This just in, Futurists. Nineveh will be destroyed!

[asterisktom]

My comments below. As a convenience to those who are going just skip over the passage here I put the verses in blue. Please notice the words underlined.

Nahum 1:1 - 11.
1 The burden against Nineveh. The book of the vision of Nahum the Elkoshite.

2 God is jealous, and the LORD avenges;
The LORD avenges and is furious.
The LORD will take vengeance on His adversaries,
And He reserves wrath for His enemies;

3 The LORD is slow to anger and great in power,
And will not at all acquit the wicked.
The LORD has His way
In the whirlwind and in the storm,
And the clouds are the dust of His feet.

4 He rebukes the sea and makes it dry,
And dries up all the rivers.
Bashan and Carmel wither,
And the flower of Lebanon wilts.

5 The mountains quake before Him,
The hills melt,
And the earth heaves at His presence,
Yes, the world and all who dwell in it.

6 Who can stand before His indignation?
And who can endure the fierceness of His anger?
His fury is poured out like fire,
And the rocks are thrown down by Him.

7 The LORD is good,
A stronghold in the day of trouble;
And He knows those who trust in Him.

8 But with an overflowing flood
He will make an utter end of its place,
And darkness will pursue His enemies.

9 What do you conspire against the LORD?
He will make an utter end of it.
Affliction will not rise up a second time.

10 For while tangled like thorns,
And while drunken like drunkards,
They shall be devoured like stubble fully dried.

11 From you comes forth one
Who plots evil against the LORD,
A wicked counselor.

The reason I gave this post the title I did is because, like JesusFan and several others here, I too am waiting for these events that literally did not happen:

Hills did not melt yet.
The Ninevites did not get burned up like stubble.
The sea was not made dry.
The rivers were not made dry.

Clearly these events are still coming. I guess, first, the Ninevites will have to return to their physical land - just like the Jews.

Actually, these events happened long time ago. To a people who no longer exist.

Why is it so hard for Futurists to understand that the same Bible, using the same kind of imagery in Zechariah and Revelation, is to be understood in the same manner?
I know why. They are committed to a system. They seem to honor that system (dispensationalism) more than they honor the Bible.

 

[JesusFan]

My comments below. As a convenience to those who are going just skip over the passage here I put the verses in blue. Please notice the words underlined.

Nahum 1:1 - 11.
1 The burden against Nineveh. The book of the vision of Nahum the Elkoshite.

2 God is jealous, and the LORD avenges;
The LORD avenges and is furious.
The LORD will take vengeance on His adversaries,
And He reserves wrath for His enemies;

3 The LORD is slow to anger and great in power,
And will not at all acquit the wicked.
The LORD has His way
In the whirlwind and in the storm,
And the clouds are the dust of His feet.

4 He rebukes the sea and makes it dry,
And dries up all the rivers.
Bashan and Carmel wither,
And the flower of Lebanon wilts.

5 The mountains quake before Him,
The hills melt,
And the earth heaves at His presence,
Yes, the world and all who dwell in it.

6 Who can stand before His indignation?
And who can endure the fierceness of His anger?
His fury is poured out like fire,
And the rocks are thrown down by Him.

7 The LORD is good,
A stronghold in the day of trouble;
And He knows those who trust in Him.

8 But with an overflowing flood
He will make an utter end of its place,
And darkness will pursue His enemies.

9 What do you conspire against the LORD?
He will make an utter end of it.
Affliction will not rise up a second time.

10 For while tangled like thorns,
And while drunken like drunkards,
They shall be devoured like stubble fully dried.

11 From you comes forth one
Who plots evil against the LORD,
A wicked counselor.

The reason I gave this post the title I did is because, like JesusFan and several others here, I too am waiting for these events that literally did not happen:

Hills did not melt yet.
The Ninevites did not get burned up like stubble.
The sea was not made dry.
The rivers were not made dry.

Clearly these events are still coming. I guess, first, the Ninevites will have to return to their physical land - just like the Jews.

Actually, these events happened long time ago. To a people who no longer exist.

Why is it so hard for Futurists to understand that the same Bible, using the same kind of imagery in Zechariah and Revelation, is to be understood in the same manner?
I know why. They are committed to a system. They seem to honor that system (dispensationalism) more than they honor the Bible.

Do you consider that the grave openning up at trumpet call of God, physical bodies arising, along with living saints atime time of second Coming to be "symbolic/allogory/apoctalyptic etc' and not to done literally as written and described by paul?

 

[asterisktom]

Do you consider that the grave openning up at trumpet call of God, physical bodies arising, along with living saints atime time of second Coming to be "symbolic/allogory/apoctalyptic etc' and not to done literally as written and described by paul?

You asked several questions at one time. They are not the same. But also, please, answer my question as well.

 

[JesusFan]

You asked several questions at one time. They are not the same. But also, please, answer my question as well.

believe that there are times when language used by God is 'Apocalymptic: in tone, so would be seen as symbolic in nature in some fashion

BUT

Not ALL prophecies were wriiten to be understood that way, have to determine by context and type of lierature, genreits written in

So can agree with you on Ninevah being written as symbolic in tone, but not say Second Coming of the Lord!

 

[asterisktom]

believe that there are times when language used by God is 'Apocalymptic: in tone, so would be seen as symbolic in nature in some fashion

BUT

Not ALL prophecies were wriiten to be understood that way, have to determine by context and type of lierature, genreits written in

So can agree with you on Ninevah being written as symbolic in tone, but not say Second Coming of the Lord!

Nineveh is not symbolic. Neither was its judgment. It was a real judgment. But it was written in symbolic language.

Jerusalem is not symbolic. Neither was its judgment. It was a real judgment. But it was written in symbolic language.

Both Revelation and the Old Testament prophets (Nahum, Zechariah, etc.) are prophetical literature. They are written in the same way. And, especially when the same types of terms are being used - clouds, fire, mountains shaking, melting, God on clouds, on horses, etc. - we should treat them the same: Symbolic representation of spiritual truth.

 

[HankD]

Nineveh is not symbolic. Neither was its judgment. It was a real judgment. But it was written in symbolic language.

Jerusalem is not symbolic. Neither was its judgment. It was a real judgment. But it was written in symbolic language.

Both Revelation and the Old Testament prophets (Nahum, Zechariah, etc.) are prophetical literature. They are written in the same way. And, especially when the same types of terms are being used - clouds, fire, mountains shaking, melting, God on clouds, on horses, etc. - we should treat them the same: Symbolic representation of spiritual truth.

Tom, how often we have been down this path...

What ever happened to reading something in it's obvious meaning such as "soon", "quickly", "this generation", etc... ?

It is a difference in hermeneutic along with a basis of discernment of literal and symbolic.

Add to this the problem of defining what spiritual truth does the symbolism represent?

The fact is that Ninevah as a nation does not exist today.

The fact is that for futurists the plain meaning of Acts 1:11 is that the same Jesus that ascended into heaven in a cloud in the body He was crucified in will come in the same manner in the same body with which He was seen to leave.

You discern as you will - Acts 1:11 does not mean what it plainly says but must be explained that it means something other than a bodily return of Jesus Christ. Same for 2 Peter 3, same for 1 Thessalonians 4, same for "every eye shall see Him", and a myriad of other passages and texts.

In that function of discernment, futurists and preterists are the same, freely exercising their ability to choose.

Above and beyond that:

Over the years I have come to the conclusion that "somethings which are hard to be understood" (not limited to preterism vs futurism) are there perhaps not just to serve as a test of doctrine but as a test of character when those opposing each other defend their individual positions.

The fruit of the Spirit in an individual an infallible indicator of the rebirth.

Of course, even His children can grieve the Holy Spirit and quench His influence in our lives.

This adverse element seems to be entering into these debates.

HankD

 

[asterisktom]

Tom, how often we have been down this path...

What ever happened to reading something in it's obvious meaning such as "soon", "quickly", "this generation", etc... ?

It is a difference in hermeneutic along with a basis of discernment of literal and symbolic.

Add to this the problem of defining what spiritual truth does the symbolism represent?

The fact is that Ninevah as a nation does not exist today.

The fact is that for futurists the plain meaning of Acts 1:11 is that the same Jesus that ascended into heaven in a cloud in the body He was crucified in will come in the same manner in the same body with which He was seen to leave.

You discern as you will - Acts 1:11 does not mean what it plainly says but must be explained that it means something other than a bodily return of Jesus Christ. Same for 2 Peter 3, same for 1 Thessalonians 4, same for "every eye shall see Him", and a myriad of other passages and texts.

In that function of discernment, futurists and preterists are the same, freely exercising their ability to choose.

Above and beyond that:

Over the years I have come to the conclusion that "somethings which are hard to be understood" (not limited to preterism vs futurism) are there perhaps not just to serve as a test of doctrine but as a test of character when those opposing each other defend their individual positions.

The fruit of the Spirit in an individual an infallible indicator of the rebirth.

Of course, even His children can grieve the Holy Spirit and quench His influence in our lives.

This adverse element seems to be entering into these debates.

HankD

This was uncalled for. And I am not going to get into a discussion with you on "this adverse element". To do so would be to truly delve into that element.

If you disagree do so, but do it with Scripture and reasoning. Don't presume to talk to me about quenching the Spirit.

 

[asterisktom]

Over the years I have come to the conclusion that "somethings which are hard to be understood" (not limited to preterism vs futurism) are there perhaps not just to serve as a test of doctrine but as a test of character when those opposing each other defend their individual positions.

No one knows this better than a Preterist.

 

[asterisktom]

Tom, how often we have been down this path...

What ever happened to reading something in it's obvious meaning such as "soon", "quickly", "this generation", etc... ?

It is a difference in hermeneutic along with a basis of discernment of literal and symbolic.

Add to this the problem of defining what spiritual truth does the symbolism represent?

The fact is that Ninevah as a nation does not exist today.

If you are going to enter into a discussion with someone else - and anyone is welcome to, of course - then at least follow the gist of the thread.

The fact is that there is both literal and metaphorical (and symbolic) usage in the Bible. I was only trying to get JesusFan to see or acknowledge that since those passages about Nineveh's destruction had a high percentage of apocalyptic imagery we should also consider that the passages that he thinks refer to future events, described similarly with those same terms, might also be taken the same way.

Thus, instead of stars falling from the sky, the heavens being rolled up like a scroll, etc. (all events that also "happened" in the OT) we might at least entertain the possibility that the events symbolized in the NT are also to be interpreted in similar fashion.

 

[Logos1]

And what bible vese would that be

Do you consider that the grave openning up at trumpet call of God, physical bodies arising, along with living saints atime time of second Coming to be "symbolic/allogory/apoctalyptic etc' and not to done literally as written and described by paul?

One mistake that Jesusfan constantly posts at the end of every post it seems like is "when did graves open up and bodies fly into the sky"

JF could you be so kind for once to include a bible verse that states graves open up and bodies fly into the sky. I don't even see any allegorical let alone literal references to such an event.

I agree you could call it a "futurist's old wives tale" but what other support do you have for this belief?

 

[Logos1]

believe that there are times when language used by God is 'Apocalymptic: in tone, so would be seen as symbolic in nature in some fashion

BUT

Not ALL prophecies were wriiten to be understood that way, have to determine by context and type of lierature, genreits written in

JF I have been busy the last two days and didn't get to respond to some of your posts, but

Since we are on the topic of when is a prophecy literal or not and what is the proper context.

Since we have 1 Thess 4:15 telling us that "we that are still alive at the Lord's coming" and 70 AD was in the life time of some of those being written to and we know that the bible is inerrant so they had to have been alive when Christ returned or still be alive today (I have seen people say they are still alive today)--can you supply any literal proof that Christ didn't return in 70 AD? Thanks.

 

[revmwc]

My comments below. As a convenience to those who are going just skip over the passage here I put the verses in blue. Please notice the words underlined.

Nahum 1:1 - 11.
1 The burden against Nineveh. The book of the vision of Nahum the Elkoshite.

2 God is jealous, and the LORD avenges;
The LORD avenges and is furious.
The LORD will take vengeance on His adversaries,
And He reserves wrath for His enemies;

3 The LORD is slow to anger and great in power,
And will not at all acquit the wicked.
The LORD has His way
In the whirlwind and in the storm,
And the clouds are the dust of His feet.

4 He rebukes the sea and makes it dry,
And dries up all the rivers.
Bashan and Carmel wither,
And the flower of Lebanon wilts.

5 The mountains quake before Him,
The hills melt,
And the earth heaves at His presence,
Yes, the world and all who dwell in it.

6 Who can stand before His indignation?
And who can endure the fierceness of His anger?
His fury is poured out like fire,
And the rocks are thrown down by Him.

7 The LORD is good,
A stronghold in the day of trouble;
And He knows those who trust in Him.

8 But with an overflowing flood
He will make an utter end of its place,
And darkness will pursue His enemies.

9 What do you conspire against the LORD?
He will make an utter end of it.
Affliction will not rise up a second time.

10 For while tangled like thorns,
And while drunken like drunkards,
They shall be devoured like stubble fully dried.

11 From you comes forth one
Who plots evil against the LORD,
A wicked counselor.

The reason I gave this post the title I did is because, like JesusFan and several others here, I too am waiting for these events that literally did not happen:

Hills did not melt yet.
The Ninevites did not get burned up like stubble.
The sea was not made dry.
The rivers were not made dry.

Clearly these events are still coming. I guess, first, the Ninevites will have to return to their physical land - just like the Jews.

Actually, these events happened long time ago. To a people who no longer exist.

Why is it so hard for Futurists to understand that the same Bible, using the same kind of imagery in Zechariah and Revelation, is to be understood in the same manner?
I know why. They are committed to a system. They seem to honor that system (dispensationalism) more than they honor the Bible.

Archaologist discoeries at ancient Ninevah "Extensive traces of ash, representing the sack of the city by Babylonians, Scythians, and Medes in 612 BC, have been found in many parts of the Acropolis."
Jeremiah 18: 6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.
7At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it;
8If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.
9And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it;
10If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.

Isn't it amazing how God brought against the nation of Assyria and the capital Ninevah another Nation to tear them down. All pof it's high places were torn down. 70 A.D. God fulfilled yet teh pulling down of another Nation by use of one He had raised up, Rome came and sacked Israel.

The rivers were made dry many times in ancient history. Cyrus diverted to the Euphrates to conquer ancient Babylon. How do we know whether this same tatic was used against Nineva as all indications are there was a river running in the middled of it. What makes us think that the invading armies didn't creat paths through mountains and hills to get into position? Military tatics tear down and move things as they prepare for battle. From the indications of Archaological finds the city was burned and the ashes remained. Sounds like it burned like stubble from that indication of the ashes. Now matbe it didn't occur as you picture it in your head but it was sacked and pillaged, and rivers were diverted and dried to defeat cities in the ancient world.

 

[asterisktom]

Archaologist discoeries at ancient Ninevah "Extensive traces of ash, representing the sack of the city by Babylonians, Scythians, and Medes in 612 BC, have been found in many parts of the Acropolis."
Jeremiah 18: 6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.
7At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it;
8If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.
9And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it;
10If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.

Isn't it amazing how God brought against the nation of Assyria and the capital Ninevah another Nation to tear them down. All pof it's high places were torn down. 70 A.D. God fulfilled yet teh pulling down of another Nation by use of one He had raised up, Rome came and sacked Israel.

The rivers were made dry many times in ancient history. Cyrus diverted to the Euphrates to conquer ancient Babylon. How do we know whether this same tatic was used against Nineva as all indications are there was a river running in the middled of it. What makes us think that the invading armies didn't creat paths through mountains and hills to get into position? Military tatics tear down and move things as they prepare for battle. From the indications of Archaological finds the city was burned and the ashes remained. Sounds like it burned like stubble from that indication of the ashes. Now matbe it didn't occur as you picture it in your head but it was sacked and pillaged, and rivers were diverted and dried to defeat cities in the ancient world.

You could very well be right. I know that the invaders of Babylon did indeed do some river diversion, but I haven't come across the same for the siege of Nineveh.

Yet the point remains on the rest of the underlined sections, especially those of 4 and 5. All I am saying is that, since apocalyptic hyperbole and exaggeration is used here in Nahum, we need to consider the possibility that much of the same type of imagery in the NT is to be understood the same way.

 

[revmwc]

JF I have been busy the last two days and didn't get to respond to some of your posts, but

Since we are on the topic of when is a prophecy literal or not and what is the proper context.

Since we have 1 Thess 4:15 telling us that "we that are still alive at the Lord's coming" and 70 AD was in the life time of some of those being written to and we know that the bible is inerrant so they had to have been alive when Christ returned or still be alive today (I have seen people say they are still alive today)--can you supply any literal proof that Christ didn't return in 70 AD? Thanks.

Why don't you prove He did?

The Holy Spirit inspired the writting of 1 Thessalonians and all books of the bible, He also inspired those who decided which should be included. When He inspired the writters, He knew that believers of today would be reading those words and knew that we (believers) who are alive and remain will not prevent those who sleep.
1 Thessalonians 4: 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Intersting Paul says Christ will bring those whose bodies are asleep with Him from Heavenverse 14. We won't prevent them from rising from the dead, intersting that it says in verse 14 they come with Christ and verse 16 says they rise first, what rises?

Then we (believers) who are living at the time of His return will be caught up and meet Him in the air and we will then be with Him forever. Tha is the rapture and that occurs before the Second Coming as described by John in Revelation 19 and 20.
19:

11And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

14And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

15And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

16And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

20: 4And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Two distinctly seperate events. Verse 16 is very clear who it is that comes on the white horse.
Verse 4 of chapter 20 makes it clear He will reign on earth amoung the nations.

So you need to offer proof that He did all of this in 70 A.D. As scripture says it will happen.

 

[revmwc]

You could very well be right. I know that the invaders of Babylon did indeed do some river diversion, but I haven't come across the same for the siege of Nineveh.

Yet the point remains on the rest of the underlined sections, especially those of 4 and 5. All I am saying is that, since apocalyptic hyperbole and exaggeration is used here in Nahum, we need to consider the possibility that much of the same type of imagery in the NT is to be understood the same way.

John had to use the imagery or hyperbole's of his day to describe the events of what he saw in his vision in Revelation, the means in which God will use will be weapons of our day. For instance he say something hit the sea and cause it to turn red and 1/3 of the living things will die. Nuclear armaments now in our time? Very possible, so those descriptions that are used in O. T. and N.T. can now be seen as modern warfare uses for certain things today, but God uses them in the time the things occur.

 

[Logos1]

Ah, so you admit you have no proof!

Why don't you prove He did?

The Holy Spirit inspired the writting of 1 Thessalonians and all books of the bible, He also inspired those who decided which should be included. When He inspired the writters, He knew that believers of today would be reading those words and knew that we (believers) who are alive and remain will not prevent those who sleep.
1 Thessalonians 4: 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Intersting Paul says Christ will bring those whose bodies are asleep with Him from Heavenverse 14. We won't prevent them from rising from the dead, intersting that it says in verse 14 they come with Christ and verse 16 says they rise first, what rises?

Then we (believers) who are living at the time of His return will be caught up and meet Him in the air and we will then be with Him forever. Tha is the rapture and that occurs before the Second Coming as described by John in Revelation 19 and 20.
19:

11And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

14And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

15And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

16And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

20: 4And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Two distinctly seperate events. Verse 16 is very clear who it is that comes on the white horse.
Verse 4 of chapter 20 makes it clear He will reign on earth amoung the nations.

So you need to offer proof that He did all of this in 70 A.D. As scripture says it will happen.

So after all this the bottom line is you just can't prove he didn't return in 70 AD. Once again you just answer the question with a question.

It seems you are pretty quick on the draw to ask for proof that he came, but when the shoe is on the other foot you are left holding an empty bag.

Just as i thought. Thanks for proving my point.

 

[asterisktom]

1 Thessalonians 4: 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

We seem to be having a problem here.
We are forgetting what the word "we" means. What it would mean to hearers and readers of Paul's letter.
It means "Paul, any of his companions in his ministry, and the ones he is writing to".
The Thessalonian Christians.
People who have long since died.

Yet, Paul said - by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit - that some of these very people will be alive at the Parousia of the Lord. Not may, not could, but will.

Either Paul was mistaken or lying. Or Christ did come within that time-frame. There are no other choices. It is this very fault of the futurist's interpretation that atheists like Bertrand Russell ("Why I am not a Christian") and liberals like CS Lewis focus on as a weak spot in Christianity. Lewis is "embarrassed" by this verse and Russell and that Islamic writer (whose name escapes me now) actually ridicule it.

 

[revmwc]

We seem to be having a problem here.
We are forgetting what the word "we" means. What it would mean to hearers and readers of Paul's letter.
It means "Paul, any of his companions in his ministry, and the ones he is writing to".
The Thessalonian Christians.
People who have long since died.

Yet, Paul said - by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit - that some of these very people will be alive at the Parousia of the Lord. Not may, not could, but will.

Either Paul was mistaken or lying. Or Christ did come within that time-frame. There are no other choices. It is this very fault of the futurist's interpretation that atheists like Bertrand Russell ("Why I am not a Christian") and liberals like CS Lewis focus on as a weak spot in Christianity. Lewis is "embarrassed" by this verse and Russell and that Islamic writer (whose name escapes me now) actually ridicule it.

So if as you say the letter was written and meant just for the Thessalonians none of it would apply to us. In fact with that logic none of the bible applies to any of us. You say "and the ones he is writing to" James was writing to the disperesed ones, John was writing to those at the seven churches, Paul to Timothy, Titus, Philemon, the Ephesians, the Roman believers, those at Corinth and the writer of Hebrews was writing to Hebrew believers so we need not look at Hebrews, so nothing Paul wrote nor John nor the Gospels would apply to us today. Peter was writting to the dispersed ones in Asia so 1 Peter doesn't apply to us, 2 Peter might apply since it was written to all of like precious faith but since nothing else applies then we can't believe on the Lord for salvation those verses don't apply to us today. We are not part of the "we" Paul was writting to by what you say.

So again we either apply all written inspired text to mean all believers of all time or it applies only yo those it was written too. Either we have hope in all scripture or we have no hope and are all condemned.

 

[revmwc]

So after all this the bottom line is you just can't prove he didn't return in 70 AD. Once again you just answer the question with a question.

It seems you are pretty quick on the draw to ask for proof that he came, but when the shoe is on the other foot you are left holding an empty bag.

Just as i thought. Thanks for proving my point.

You have yet to prove He did come in 70 A.D. as you claim. Show some Historic event that shows 1000's of dead bodies in Asia minor that for no apparent reason in 70 A.D. were laying in the streets. The claim by preterist is that the body rots and won't be resurreected so those bodies would need to be laying in the streets or homes. You would need to show that the churches in Asia Minor were abandoned for Christ to have come in 70 A.D. the churches would be empty, where is your historical proof? No the proof that He didn't come in 70 A.D. is the fact that the Church is here today, we are believers in Christ and have trusted in Him. For 70 A.D. to have shown His return scripture is clear the worl ends after He reigns 1000 years. A new haeaven and earth appear that hasn't ahppened and there in lies the proof that in 70 A.D. Christ did not return.

Please prove it happened in 70 A.D.since you claim it did, the burden to prove it is not on me, you claim it happened and have given no proof it did.

I showed from scripture after scripture what is prophsied and you have no proof to support your theory, my point was proven in the fact that the Church still exist today. Once again you claim your point is proven because I can't prove it didn't happen well I just offered the best proof we have. The ?Gospel is still being Propigated today, we are still going into all the world making disciples and baptizing in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, if He has come then all those things would have ended. There is the proof.

 

[asterisktom]

So if as you say the letter was written and meant just for the Thessalonians none of it would apply to us.

It is not a case of either/or but of both/and. The passage is written both to the Thessalonians and for us.

Your interpretation makes it be to us - and not concerning the Thessalonians at all. You would, in effect, snatch the Epistle out of needy, persecuted 1st-century Thessalonian hands and tell them, "This doesn't concern you!".

My interpretation, the Preterist interpretation, is that the letter was written primarily to them. The promise - just as it was stated, was fulfilled in their life time (some of them). The principals and the teachings associated with this passage ( and I can easily see half a dozen good points from these two verses alone) are for Christians of all ages.