Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41
  1. #1
    Registered User

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    1,637
    Post Thanks / Like

    The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Discussions about the Book of Revelation don’t come up often on ODN (if ever). However, in this thread, I want to clear up a few common misconceptions many Christians have concerning the Book of Revelation . I do not want to discuss the whole book just yet (as we can do that in other threads later)…rather, I want to break down a couple misconceptions before moving on. These misconceptions (as I see them) are:

    • “The coming of the son of man on clouds” / “The day of the Lord”

    • “Pre-Tribulational rapture”



    “The coming of the son of man on clouds”

    For those of you on ODN who do not know, I hold to a partial preterist interpretation of the “end times” (click here for more). What this view basically says is that the Olivet Discourse, Parts of Daniel's 70 weeks and most of Revelation refers to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70AD. This view reads these passages much more figuratively than the dispensational view and, as I believe, rightly so.

    Many Christians think it is impossible to understand the BoR (Book of Revelation), it uses highly symbolic/figurative language that seems very strange to us today. Part of this confusion IMO stems from lack of knowledge of the OT (Old Testament) prophets. You see, the BoR contains just over 400 verses…around 270 of those verses are DIRECT references to OT passages, in particular, passages from OT prophets. So, to understand the language used in the BoR, one must be familiar with OT prophets and how the language was used in the OT, which sadly, most Christians aren’t.

    In Revelation 1:7 it says:
    7Look, he is coming with the clouds,
    and every eye will see him,
    even those who pierced him;
    and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen.


    Most Christians (and non-Christians) will read this and think that it refers to the second coming of Christ…however, if we see how this language is used in the OT, I think we will have a very different picture of the meaning of this verse:

    Isaiah 19:1
    An oracle concerning Egypt:
    See, the LORD rides on a swift cloud
    and is coming to Egypt.
    The idols of Egypt tremble before him,
    and the hearts of the Egyptians melt within them


    If you read all of Isaiah 19 you will clearly see that this verse is not talking about Jesus or the Father riding a cloud to Egypt. No, it is pronouncing God’s judgment upon Egypt. The phrase, “he is coming on clouds” does not ANYWHERE in scripture talk about the second coming of Christ, in every spot it is used, it is symbolic of God’s judgment coming upon a nation…through an army or other destructive force.

    In several other spots in Revelation, it refers to “the day of the Lord” and many Christians again falsely assume this refers to the second coming. However, let’s see how this language is used in the OT:

    Ezekiel 30:3
    For the day is near,
    the day of the LORD is near—
    a day of clouds,
    a time of doom for the nations


    Again, if you read all of Ezekiel 30, you will clearly see that “the day of the LORD” refers to God’s judgment…

    Obadiah 1:15
    The day of the LORD is near
    for all nations.
    As you have done, it will be done to you;
    your deeds will return upon your own head


    Again, if you read all of Obadiah 1 you will see that this also refers to God’s judgment upon a nation

    Much, much more could be written on this…this is just a basic overview, but I think it is clear that “the coming of the son of man on clouds” and “the day of the Lord”, are not phrases used ANYWHERE in scripture referring to the second coming, but rather, God’s judgment upon a people or nation.


    “Pre-Tribulational Rapture”

    Many Christians hold to what is called a “pre-tribulational rapture” (dispensational) view of Revelation. They believe, that at some future time, Jesus will “come on clouds” (see above) and the church (Christians) will be raptured into heaven which will be followed by 7 years of tribulation followed by the final judgment. This unfortunately, cannot be found anywhere in scripture and the reason many Christians believe this to be true is because of a fiction book called “Left Behind”.

    Now, some try to say that a pre-trib rapture is found in scripture…they will say: “After chapter 3 in Revalation, the church is no longer mentioned and therefore we are to assume they have been raptured”. There are SEVERAL problems with this, first off, the church as a whole is never even mentioned in Revelation 1-3, those chapters are written to 7 specific churches, but they never address the church as a whole. Secondly, this is what is referred to as eisegesis (reading into the text what isn’t there). No where do these verses even come CLOSE to implying or saying that the church is going to be raptured right before a “tribulation”, yet, just because John is not addressing his letter to specific churches after verse 3, it somehow gets read into the text that the church was raptured before a tribulation…
    Bottom line, a pre-trib rapture is found no where in scripture….

    Now, much, much more could be written on each topic, but I think this is good enough for now. If you want to learn more about Preterism, go to Tektonics, they have some good stuff on it....and just to clear up any confusion on my beliefs, I DO believe that Jesus will come again, there are many verses in the Bible that refer to this, however, the verses mentioned do not...

    For right now, I only want to focus on the above two examples…tell me if you agree or disagree and why. Also, before responding, I kindly ask that you read the entire post...thanks.
    Last edited by nanderson; February 1st, 2006 at 06:32 AM.
    Nandy For World Domination Clan
    ~Leader~

    We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.
    - The Apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 10:5)

  2. Likes Sigfried liked this post
  3. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri
    Posts
    20
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    To briefly counter one of the several 'misconceptions' posted by nanderson one would point out that in earlier books of the new testament Christ took the new testament church as his bride. He married the church and continues to have an intimate relationship with it. Now the reason I brought this up is because many Christians today will point to this as a reason for a pre- tribulation rapture. It only makes sense that if you intend a punishment as harsh as tribulation that you would not permit your faithful spouse to endure such hardship. If your house becomes infected with insects would you not take your wife out of the house before you fumigate it? Such is the same relationship between a man and woman that christ has with his church.
    Many would also argue to your definition of the church. Many christians see the church not as the entire body of christian believers but as a local congregation of believers. This would defend the idea that the church would be raptured before the tribulation when it is not mentioned in later revelations after the letters to the seven local churches.

  4. Likes Sigfried liked this post
  5. #3
    Registered User

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    1,637
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Just a quick FYI...blacy is a good friend of mine...he was the best man at my wedding, make him feel welcome!


    Quote Originally Posted by blacy
    To briefly counter one of the several 'misconceptions' posted by nanderson one would point out that in earlier books of the new testament Christ took the new testament church as his bride. He married the church and continues to have an intimate relationship with it. Now the reason I brought this up is because many Christians today will point to this as a reason for a pre- tribulation rapture. It only makes sense that if you intend a punishment as harsh as tribulation that you would not permit your faithful spouse to endure such hardship. If your house becomes infected with insects would you not take your wife out of the house before you fumigate it? Such is the same relationship between a man and woman that christ has with his church.
    Some very good points blacy. Unfortunately, your whole "bride" analogy is not found in scripture (in reference to keeping the church from harm). There are several times throughout the Bible that God judges the church/his people (or allows tribulation). You forget the Israelites out in the desert, you forget Job, etc.

    No, the tribulation spoken of in the Bible is that of a near event...in fact, here is what Christ himelf told his disciples in reference to the coming tribulation and who would endure it:

    Matthew 24:8-11
    All these are the beginning of birth pains.
    9"Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people.


    Notice the bold. Christ clearly told them that THEY (ie disciples/believers) would be persecuted and put to death. He is not speaking of some future event here, but rather, a tribulation that would take place soon and a tribulation the church would have to endure.



    Many christians see the church not as the entire body of christian believers but as a local congregation of believers.
    The "church" in the Bible is referred to in many different ways. Sometimes it is used in reference to a local congregation and sometimes to the body of believers (Christians)....

    This would defend the idea that the church would be raptured before the tribulation when it is not mentioned in later revelations after the letters to the seven local churches.
    In Revelation, John is specifically addressing his letter to THOSE seven churches. So unless it is your contention that only those churches will be raptured, your point fails. Also, them not being mentioned does not mean they were raptured into heaven...that is reading alot into the text that certainly isn't there. No where in the Bible does it mention the church being raptured before a tribulation and you will have to come up with something better than "they aren't mentioned", if you are to convince me otherwise.

    Also, you will have to address the whole "coming on clouds" issue I brought up as well. To hold to your view (pre-trib), you have to believe that those verses (Revalation 1:7) are referring to the second coming of Christ..if they are not (as I have shown), then the whole pre-trib view falls apart.
    Last edited by nanderson; January 31st, 2006 at 11:44 AM.
    Nandy For World Domination Clan
    ~Leader~

    We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.
    - The Apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 10:5)

  6. #4
    I've been given a "timeout"

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Banville
    Posts
    4,160
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by nanderson
    Just a quick FYI...blacy is a good friend of mine...he was the best man at my wedding, make him feel welcome!




    Some very good points blacy. Unfortunately, your whole "bride" analogy is not found in scripture (in reference to keeping the church from harm). There are several times throughout the Bible that God judges the church/his people (or allows tribulation). You forget the Israelites out in the desert, you forget Job, etc.

    No, the tribulation spoken of in the Bible is that of a near event...in fact, here is what Christ himelf told his disciples in reference to the coming tribulation and who would endure it:

    Matthew 24:8-11
    All these are the beginning of birth pains.
    9"Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people.


    Notice the bold. Christ clearly told them that THEY (ie disciples/believers) would be persecuted and put to death. He is not speaking of some future event here, but rather, a tribulation that would take place soon and a tribulation the church would have to endure.





    The "church" in the Bible is referred to in many different ways. Sometimes it is used in reference to a local congregation and sometimes to the body of believers (Christians)....



    In Revelation, John is specifically addressing his letter to THOSE seven churches. So unless it is your contention that only those churches will be raptured, your point fails. Also, them not being mentioned does not mean they were raptured into heaven...that is reading alot into the text that certainly isn't there. No where in the Bible does it mention the church being raptured before a tribulation and you will have to come up with something better than "they aren't mentioned", if you are to convince me otherwise.

    Also, you will have to address the whole "coming on clouds" issue I brought up as well. To hold to your view (pre-trib), you have to believe that those verses (Revalation 1:7) are referring to the second coming of Christ..if they are not (as I have shown), then the whole pre-trib view falls apart.
    The pre trib rapture theory has been discounted by several biblical scholars namely James White, C.H. Spurgeon, etc.
    It is something that must be explained with out doubt and cannot, it can only be mentioned and thought about as the passages that talk about it are not clear.
    I must ask Nan what is your belief system, what is your statement of faith, do you have a statement of faith, or do you prefer the term non denominational christian (which is taken by orthodox and catholics as well as denominational christians to mean someone who cannot make up their mind.)
    I ask you this question because it will help me to respond better to your query and hopefully not irritate you to much.
    thanks
    chat again soon.

    P.S. the whole rapture theory has been discounted by others another reason i asked what you believe as it seems this discussion is the result of a sermon or book you heard or read recently>?

  7. #5
    Registered User

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    1,637
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by wannaextreme
    The pre trib rapture theory has been discounted...
    I agree with this...I'm not sure I understand your post, but if you read mine, you will see that I do not hold to a pre-trib rapture either and there are quit a few Christians(though the minority) that agree with me.

    I must ask Nan what is your belief system, what is your statement of faith, do you have a statement of faith, or do you prefer the term non denominational christian (which is taken by orthodox and catholics as well as denominational christians to mean someone who cannot make up their mind.)
    I ask you this question because it will help me to respond better to your query and hopefully not irritate you to much.
    thanks
    chat again soon.
    I am a protestant Christian (see my profile) and belong to the Baptist denomination. I hold to a partial preterist interpretaton of Revelation, read the below link for info on partial preterism if you are unsure what I am talking about:

    http://www.tektonics.org/esch/pretsum.html



    another reason i asked what you believe as it seems this discussion is the result of a sermon or book you heard or read recently>?
    I have not recently heard a sermon or read a book on this...this is something I've been want to post for a while and is a discussion I have had many times with my friend "blacy" and since he has just joined the site, I thought this would be a good time to post it.

    I think you might be confused though, I do NOT hold to a pre-trib rapture interpretation.
    Last edited by nanderson; January 31st, 2006 at 05:11 PM.
    Nandy For World Domination Clan
    ~Leader~

    We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.
    - The Apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 10:5)

  8. #6
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,470
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Of all the books of the Bible, the one I understand perhaps the least is Revelation. I believe my situation is shared by many Christians, simply because of, as you mentioned, the almost exclusively symbolic or figurative language used. Now then, I am familiar with both the preterist and futurist interpretations of the End of Days, the former referring to the events described in Revelation happening in the past, centered around the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD, and the latter referring to their happening at least around 2,000 years (the present) later.

    At this point I tend to think that the Rapture and Tribulation are going to happen sometime in the future, since to me it seems that the scripture clearly teaches that after these things happen, the world as we know it will end, with Christ returning and establishing his kingdom on Earth for a certain time, literally 1,000 years, or possibly eternity, although frankly I am not sure how this kingdom comports with Heaven, unless it will be the case that there will no longer be a difference between Earth and Heaven. The issue of Hell also becomes unclear to me in this scenario. However, I certainly think a very strong case can be made for the belief that what Revelation describes is referring at least in part to first century Hebrew events, mainly concerning the Second Temple. The main lesson I derive from the scripture is basically that the world will not always go on as it is, evil and corrupted, and Christ will indeed come again, as He promised. As for the details of which piece of symbology refers to which past, present or future historical event, I do not claim to know.

  9. #7
    I've been given a "timeout"

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Banville
    Posts
    4,160
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by nanderson
    I agree with this...I'm not sure I understand your post, but if you read mine, you will see that I do not hold to a pre-trib rapture either and there are quit a few Christians(though the minority) that agree with me.



    I am a protestant Christian (see my profile) and belong to the Baptist denomination. I hold to a partial preterist interpretaton of Revelation, read the below link for info on partial preterism if you are unsure what I am talking about:

    http://www.tektonics.org/esch/pretsum.html





    I have not recently heard a sermon or read a book on this...this is something I've been want to post for a while and is a discussion I have had many times with my friend "blacy" and since he has just joined the site, I thought this would be a good time to post it.

    I think you might be confused though, I do NOT hold to a pre-trib rapture interpretation.
    Awesome, i did attempt to clarify it but failed :(
    to the point i would tend to agree with you in the case of post rapture as it is clearly outlined, though not of the christian persusasion (meaning me) you have researched your work well, congrats
    Last edited by wanxtrmBANNED; January 31st, 2006 at 09:14 PM.

  10. #8
    Registered User

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    1,637
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinBrowning
    At this point I tend to think that the Rapture and Tribulation are going to happen sometime in the future, since to me it seems that the scripture clearly teaches that after these things happen, the world as we know it will end
    Where is this scripture?
    Nandy For World Domination Clan
    ~Leader~

    We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.
    - The Apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 10:5)

  11. #9
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    With my Angel in Aurora
    Posts
    5,722
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Okay, having read the OP twice, I have some questions:

    1) The seven letters to the seven churches: Now is there more on that? Why does John stop addressing each one individually? Is he addressing all of them collectively after Ch.3 or is he addressing EVERYONE and not just the churches?

    2) The plagues, death, war, etc. Are these pre or post the AD Jerusalem attack? Or is it divided?

    3) The two beasts? Again, pre or post? It's probably all symbolic (I can't imagine a scary ass beast coming out of the earth or sea and NOT being shelled to **** by the military) but still worth asking. IF symbolic, WHAT are they symbols for? What would the origins of their arrival have to do with their nature?

    4) The mark of the beast thing. I've heard a score of different views. From End of Days' little, "It was a dream, it was really 999" to people, albeit realistically, pointing to companies creating the technology that puts a computer chip in your forearm. Would that be it? What's the evil of that?

    How do these relate to Partial Preterism? (I didn't read the entire links regarding that belief, so I'll go read them now, and if they answer it, I'll edit this)
    But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.
    1 Peter 3:15-16

  12. #10
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,470
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by nanderson
    Where is this scripture?
    I did not mean that the world itself will end, but the world as we know it. By this, I mean that my interpretation is that once the Rapture and Tribulation occur, Jesus Christ will return and establish His Earthly kingdom. Once the kingdom of God is on Earth, for however long that may be, or if that is in fact eternity, wherein Heaven and Earth will be unified, then it will no longer bear resemblance to the world that exists today.

    This is merely speculation, based on my incomplete knowledge of the symbology of Revelation. Do you agree that Jesus is returning in the future and establishing his kingdom on this Earth, based on the scripture in question?

  13. #11
    I've been given a "timeout"

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Banville
    Posts
    4,160
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinBrowning
    I did not mean that the world itself will end, but the world as we know it. By this, I mean that my interpretation is that once the Rapture and Tribulation occur, Jesus Christ will return and establish His Earthly kingdom. Once the kingdom of God is on Earth, for however long that may be, or if that is in fact eternity, wherein Heaven and Earth will be unified, then it will no longer bear resemblance to the world that exists today.

    This is merely speculation, based on my incomplete knowledge of the symbology of Revelation. Do you agree that Jesus is returning in the future and establishing his kingdom on this Earth, based on the scripture in question?

    First establish there is a jesus?

    Joking this is an interesting line and im following (just messing with you kevin)

  14. #12
    Registered User

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    1,637
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Hyde
    Okay, having read the OP twice, I have some questions:

    Hyde, for now, I will only briefly address your questions as I don't want to deal with ALL of the aspects of partial preterism in THIS thread. We must first establish the two misconceptions I presented and in other threads I will delve into this more...I don't want to stray off-topic just yet

    1) The seven letters to the seven churches: Now is there more on that? Why does John stop addressing each one individually? Is he addressing all of them collectively after Ch.3 or is he addressing EVERYONE and not just the churches?
    There were two visions, one concerning each of the 7 churches and one concerning a coming tribulation and the "anti-Christ" (which the Bible simply defines as one who "opposes Christ", it doesn't have to be the devil as some people falsely assume). He addresses the first vision to the 7 churches (because that is what it is about) and the second to all people of the time.

    2) The plagues, death, war, etc. Are these pre or post the AD Jerusalem attack? Or is it divided?
    The "plagues" are pre and during the Jerusalem attack and are HIGHLY symbolic. I don't think anyone reading this verse would take it literally...and again, it goes directly back to OT language..like I said, I will extrapolate on this more in future threads.

    3) The two beasts? Again, pre or post? It's probably all symbolic (I can't imagine a scary ass beast coming out of the earth or sea and NOT being shelled to **** by the military) but still worth asking. IF symbolic, WHAT are they symbols for? What would the origins of their arrival have to do with their nature?

    4) The mark of the beast thing. I've heard a score of different views. From End of Days' little, "It was a dream, it was really 999" to people, albeit realistically, pointing to companies creating the technology that puts a computer chip in your forearm. Would that be it? What's the evil of that?
    The beast spoken of in revelation is pre, post and during the fall of Jerusalem, he is the "anti-Christ" that is driving this tribulation.

    Also, remember John says in Revelation that the number (666)"is the number of a man's name; and his number is 666"

    Most people aren't familiar with gematria, where each letter of the Hebrew alphabet directly corresponds to a number.
    Interesting enough, Nero (who was greatly persecuting the Christians and brought about the destruction of the Temple)...which would be rendered in the original language as "NRWN QSR" (Nero Ceasar as it was said back then)

    N = 50
    R = 200
    W = 6
    N = 50
    Q = 100
    S = 60
    R = 200

    Bringing us a grand total of....you guessed it, 666. This leads most partial preterists to conclude that Nero is the "beast" spoken of in Revelation.

    My next thread on partial preterism will deal with this more and explain all the aspects of the "beast".

    How do these relate to Partial Preterism? (I didn't read the entire links regarding that belief, so I'll go read them now, and if they answer it, I'll edit this)
    Thanks for the questions Hyde...I gave a very basic overview to some of your questions and will answer them more in-depth at a later date in another thread, but in this thread I want to focus more on the two misconceptions I brought up, so if you have any more questions on the above, I will gladly answer them via PM...thanks.
    Nandy For World Domination Clan
    ~Leader~

    We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.
    - The Apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 10:5)

  15. #13
    Registered User

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    1,637
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinBrowning
    By this, I mean that my interpretation is that once the Rapture and Tribulation occur, Jesus Christ will return and establish His Earthly kingdom.
    O.K. Let's discuss this a bit. Where does it say that after the rapture and tribulation occurs, Jesus will come again and establish his kingdom?

    Do you agree that Jesus is returning in the future and establishing his kingdom on this Earth, based on the scripture in question?
    I believe that Jesus is returning in the future and will establish his kingdom on earth...but not based on any scriptures I have mentioned thus far (though it is spoken of in Revelation)
    Nandy For World Domination Clan
    ~Leader~

    We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.
    - The Apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 10:5)

  16. #14
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    180
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    This has been a very frustrating ordeal. I have submitted two post and neither one was accepted in reply to the OP on this thread. After a couple of hours of work I am going to cut this short.

    I see the OP'er identified himself as a partial Preterist. I was just wondering why partial and not full Preterist? I would be interested in discussing this more fully with the OP'er but since I am new I am not allowed to quote the OP'er, it seems.

    Peter

  17. #15
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    457
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by PGA2 View Post
    This has been a very frustrating ordeal. I have submitted two post and neither one was accepted in reply to the OP on this thread. After a couple of hours of work I am going to cut this short.

    I see the OP'er identified himself as a partial Preterist. I was just wondering why partial and not full Preterist? I would be interested in discussing this more fully with the OP'er but since I am new I am not allowed to quote the OP'er, it seems.

    Peter

    Being the new guy can be an ordeal can't it? I have watched this site for some time but fairly new to posting. After you have made a couple posts your access does change.

    This is a thread from 2006 though and I haven't seen this person post in a while, so you may not get a response from the Op.

    I think "end times" is an interesting topic, although it seems it has been "end times" for centuries now........

  18. #16
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    180
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Being the new guy can be an ordeal can't it? I have watched this site for some time but fairly new to posting. After you have made a couple posts your access does change.

    This is a thread from 2006 though and I haven't seen this person post in a while, so you may not get a response from the Op.

    I think "end times" is an interesting topic, although it seems it has been "end times" for centuries now........
    Thanks for the reply! Yes, until the system is figured out posting can be frustrating. There is a good page that explains the format:

    http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/misc.php?do=bbcode

    It is too bad Mr. Anderson is no longer with us (or so it seems).

    The predominant view since the 1830's when Darby made it popular is Dispensationalism. It does not make sense.

    People do not pay attention to the audience of address and timeframe, IMO. Take the Olivet Discourse, for instance. The passage deals with a 1st-century people and the end of their age (Matthew 24:3) at the destruction of Jerusalem (vs. 1-3 or Luke 21:20-24).

    Jesus comes to an OT people who reject Him, enlarge. From Day 1 of His ministry (John the Baptist, crying in the wilderness, to make way for the Lord), there is soon coming judgment. That is because the NT mainly concerns itself about two events that relate to OT Israel. The first is their promised Messiah. The second is God's judgment on an OT people. The sanctions/curses of Deuteronomy 28 are being applied with the rejection of their Messiah, by the Messiah.

    He comes to fulfill all righteousness for His people (Matthew 1:21-23), and they reject Him (John 1:11-12). To those who do not reject Him He gives them the hope/right of eternal life.

    Where I differ from Mr. Anderson is that I believe everything written in the Law and Prophets concerning these Old Covenant people was fulfilled by A.D. 70 Luke 24), not just in part but in full (Matthew 5:17-18). That is the difference between someone who favors partial Preterism and full Preterism. Now, if I am wrong, I have not heard a sufficient argument to refute the full Preterist view.

    I believe Scripture backs my position over his even though we agree on many fronts and there is lots of unity there.

    After A.D. 70 the requirements of the Mosaic Covenant can no longer be met. Therefore, that means that Jesus has fulfilled everything required. When you couple that idea with Daniel 9:24-27 and other passages such as Matthew 5:17-18 it becomes even more evident.

    Matthew 5:17-18 (NASB)
    17*“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18*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.

    Note: Not the smallest letter or stroke of the Law or Prophets will pass away until all is accomplished. If Jesus came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets and some of the Law is unable to be fulfilled by the people, even the smallest letter, then the Law has passed away.

    What we witness in A.D. 70 is an end to atonement under the Old Covenant Law. The requirements of that covenant can no longer be met. Their sacrificial system is no longer functional. There is no longer a priesthood to take the offerings before God on behalf of the people. The High Priest can no longer enter the temple on the Day of Atonement because there no longer is a temple. The feast days required by OT Law can no longer be followed in the manner required by the Law because they too required an animal sacrifice. The genealogies kept in the temple are destroyed. They are no longer needed. The priesthood can no longer be verified as to ensure a person is of the lineage of Levi.

    Now, couple that with Daniel 9:

    Daniel 9:24 (NASB)
    Seventy Weeks and the Messiah
    24*“Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place.


    Seventy weeks of years are decreed for DANIEL'S people AND their holy city! Who are Daniel's people? They are an Old Covenant people. What city is being referenced? It is Jerusalem.

    1) The end of their transgression is finished by A.D. 70. God has brought Deuteronomy 28:15 (and onwards) curses upon these people. The seven-fold judgments of Deuteronomy 28 are seen in Revelation. Revelation deals with the judgment of apostate OT Israel, just as every NT book does (another indication that every NT book was written before A.D. 70 since there is not ONE mention of an already destroyed temple and city. This non-destruction is highly significant because the whole nation revolves around temple sacrifice and worship)

    2) After A.D. 70 the sin offering is done away with because the people can no longer make atonement for their sins. There is now a better offering in place and a better covenant. Hebrews is all about the contrast between the two covenants; the Old Covenant and the New and better Covenant. Notice that the letter is written to Hebrew Christians who are in danger of turning back to Judaism (Hebrews 6; see Hebrews 8:13 also). The author is warning them of the superiority of the NT, and the OT offering system is still in effect (see Hebrews 9). That means the temple is still standing. Notice Hebrews 9:26-28:
    26*Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27*And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, 28*so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.

    Remember, when the OT High Priest went into the Holy of Holies, once a year, to atone for all the sins of the people, the people waiting in high expectation for their Mediator to come out of the temple, signifying that God had accepted the offering. That is why the coming of the Messiah, the Mediator is of such importance. He was coming soon. His salvation offering would be confirmed by those who doubted by A.D. 70. He went into the heavenly sanctuary, but He had not yet returned.

    Notice Jesus comes twice, not three times or many times as the partial Preterist would have to believe. He comes at the incarnation and is eventually crucified to take away sins. He is coming again to dispense of salvation for those waiting. That, I claim, is A.D. 70.

    Jesus, in the gospels, speaks of two ages, the one that IS, and the ONE to come. The one that is (and the age He came to) is the Old Covenant age. The one to come is the age He brings in when He comes in the glory of the Father in A.D. 70 (Matthew 16:27-28), while some of those He spoke to at the transfiguration were still alive.

    3) Jesus made atonement for iniquity for all who would believe, not only Jews, but Gentiles too; not only for that age, but for the age to come and that came in A.D. 70. If He did not make atonement for sins then we are still in our sins (heaven forbid).

    4) The bringing in of everlasting righteousness was when He came again. Most every NT book/epistle/gospel/Revelation speaks of a soon coming. They talk about Jesus being that righteousness for everyone who believes, kept in heaven until He comes. These writings speak of a SOON coming judgment, of "That Day," "The Day of Judgment," "The Day of God's Wrath," and they speak of it within the lifetime of those present.

    5) The sealing up of all prophecy is its fulfillment. Daniel is told to seal it up. John, in Revelation, witnesses it being opened by the Lamb of God.

    So, I don't see how you can say any of the OT prophecies have not been met. The Messiah was prophesied to come to an OT people, but these people do not live in covenant with God after A.D. 70.

    Daniel 12:7 says:

    7*I heard the man dressed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, as he raised his right hand and his left toward heaven, and swore by Him who lives forever that it would be for a time, times, and half a time; and as soon as they finish shattering the power of the holy people, all these events will be completed.

    As soon as the power of the holy people has been shattered (their power is their relationship with God) all the events spoken of in Daniel 12 will be complete. Daniel is told to go his way until the end of the age when judgment will take place (see verse 1 and 13). Also, Jesus refers to the same end of the age Daniel does in His Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24:3).

    Much more could be said, but for those who claim there is no evidence of God, they are grossly mistaken. History revolves around A.D. 70, the fulfillment of the New Covenant. Between A.D. 30 and A.D. 70 there is a 40 year period of grace in which God gives these OT people time to enter the Promised Land. Many did not (see Hebrews 3-4).

    An important theme of discussion is also the typology of Jesus Christ (for instance - Hebrews) in the OT and the mirroring of many events in spiritual terms. But that is another discussion that can be expanded upon. I'll give you a little taste. In the OT you have God's judgment on the firstborn of Egypt, but those who have blood sprinkled on their door frames and lentil escape. The Passover lamb is sacrificed. In the NT Jesus is our Passover Lamb. His blood is shed on the cross beam and head of the cross. In the OT you have Moses taking his people out of the land of sin and bondage. In the NT Jesus brings His people out of sin and bondage and sets them free. In the OT you have the Exodus from Egypt to the Land of Promise. In the NT you have Jesus taking His people from the land of bondage into the New Promised Land. In the OT you have Moses receiving the Covenant at Mt. Sinai. In the NT you have Jesus receiving it at Mt. Zion. In the OT the people, because of sin, do not enter the Promised Land during that generation. In the NT the same warning is given (Hebrews 3). Moses says that there will be a Prophet LIKE him (Deuteronomy 18:18). That Prophet is Jesus. Moses takes his people as far as the Promised Land but does not enter into it. Jesus takes His people into the Promised Land as the first fruits from the dead. Over and over we see He accomplishes what Moses could not. There are so much more spiritual truths here, but I think you get an idea of where I am going. Remember that He explained on the Road to Emmaus (Luke 24:18-27; 44-48) everything concerning Himself in in the Scriptures. The Scriptures He spoke of at the time of His ministry was the OT Scriptures.

    18*One of them, named Cleopas, answered and said to Him, “Are You the only one visiting Jerusalem and unaware of the things which have happened here in these days?” 19*And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, 20*and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to the sentence of death, and crucified Him. 21*But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel. Indeed, besides all this, it is the third day since these things happened. 22*But also some women among us amazed us. When they were at the tomb early in the morning, 23*and did not find His body, they came, saying that they had also seen a vision of angels who said that He was alive. 24*Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just exactly as the women also had said; but Him they did not see.” 25*And He said to them, “O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26*Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into His glory?” 27*Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.... 44*Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45*Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46*and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, 47*and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. 48*You are witnesses of these things. 49*And behold, I am sending forth the promise of My Father upon you; but you are to stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.”

    The same theme is also expressed in Luke 21:20-24.

    Peter

  19. Thanks MindTrap028 thanked for this post
    Likes Squatch347 liked this post
  20. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    According to Pollux's Onomasticon, andrapodistes means "one who reduces a freeborn person to slavery or who kidnaps someone else's slave"

  21. #18
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    180
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Quote Originally Posted by 124danchoi View Post
    According to Pollux's Onomasticon, andrapodistes means "one who reduces a freeborn person to slavery or who kidnaps someone else's slave"
    I'm not sure who you are addressing.

    ---------- Post added at 02:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:38 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by 124danchoi View Post
    According to Pollux's Onomasticon, andrapodistes means "one who reduces a freeborn person to slavery or who kidnaps someone else's slave"
    PS. Welcome!

  22. #19
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    207
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Hello, Everyone.

    I would like to deal with the question asked by Nanderson by asking two related questions. They are question I asked PGA in another thread...and go to the predicate of these kinds of discussions.

    You folk are all guessing the Bible (this "scripture" thing) is the word of a god.

    Here is what I wrote over in the other thread:

    PGA...let's start with the question of your acceptance of the Bible.

    All I can do with regard to the Bible is to make the best guess that I can about it.

    Here is my guess about that book (JUST A GUESS):

    It appears to me to be the product of a relatively unsophisticated, superstitious Hebrew sect with limited access to knowledge about the scope of the (presently) known universe. It appears to me to be primarily a self-serving history of the early Hebrews...interspersed with a fanciful (and fearful) mythology. The early Hebrews like the early Greeks, Romans and Norsemen...with their limited knowledge...invented gods to answer mysteries that they encountered in simply being alive. The Hebrews were surrounded by perceived enemies with angry, mean-spirited, vengeful, demanding gods...so it makes sense to me that they would invent an angry, mean-spirited, vengeful, demanding god to protect themselves from their enemies' gods...which is what they did.

    It is my guess that the story of that invention...is what we now call "the Bible."

    Why do you think your guess about the Bible makes more sense than that?

    And why do you think that your guess about the Bible is more than a guess?


    So I ask anyone here in this thread: Why do you think your guess about that book makes more sense than mine...and why do you think your guesses are more than guesses?

  23. #20
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    457
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The End Times: A couple misconceptions

    Name a time since religion began, that we weren't in "the end times".....

 

 
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Why the birthrate of males to females is lower during times of hardship
    By Meng Bomin in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 24th, 2006, 08:11 AM
  2. What If You Could Just Click Your Heels Three Times
    By sylouette in forum Hypothetical Debates
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: December 29th, 2005, 06:05 AM
  3. Bush Lied about War? Nope, No News There!
    By Pibs in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: December 21st, 2005, 10:45 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •