Featured Let Jesus be Jesus and Preterism Rings and Reigns all through the Bible

So would I be correct in thinking you don’t really have an argument against preterism you just choose not to believe it regardless of all the evidence demanding a first century return of Christ?

The flip side of that is that you don’t really have a futurist argument you just choose to believe it.

There are no bible verses to support a coming of Christ that is future to us. Given all the direct and specific language that His coming would be soon and in the life time of the generation having the gospel preached to them by the Apostles it would be pure folly to elevate your opinion above the teaching of the inspired Apostles who were guided by the Holy Spirit. If they were wrong then the Holy Spirit was wrong. If the Holy Spirit can be proven wrong then we don’t really have any foundation for Christianity.

 

It's a simple revelation anyone can fine in the scriptures

Welcome Yeshua1,

I appreciate your at least taking a stab with verse references to back up your view point; however, these don’t really support a future to us coming of Christ.

As for returning in like manner note in Act 1:9 He passes out of their sight since they can’t see nor say where he went the two angels are testifying that he “returned into heaven” in like manner as he “left earth”. It is necessary to provide proof that he is the Son of God and only the Son of God would go to heaven at that time since souls weren’t yet going there upon death. This has nothing to do with his return to earth—that is dealt with later, but not here.

All saints into glorified form means at the end of the old covenant and the full beginning of the new covenant which would have been in 70 AD when the temple was destroyed and his return in judgment that saints would be resurrected to heaven from sheol or the pit where ever souls were kept until the time of his return. You wouldn’t actually see them rising from the grave in physical form. This was spiritual remember he said His kingdom would come without observation.

As far as lightening flashing this is simply apocalyptic language such as Zechariah 9:14, Jehovah's influence would go forth as lightning. There are many such examples through the OT that aren’t meant for us to literalize them. I’m sure you must be familiar with such writing.

As far as all eyes seeing Him in Rev 1:7 it seems you didn’t realize that use of “see” means perceive with the mind not see with the literal eyeball. It is easier to understand when you read a little further when it says including those who pierced Him. Obviously His return has to be in the first generation for those who pierced Him to still be alive at the time of His return—you don’t want to claim they are still alive today 2,000 years later do you? LOL.

So no special revelation was necessary on my part, but I hope I have helped to clear up some of the confusion on your part.

Also, note that none of the verses you alluded to suggested he would come a long time in the future—I challenge you to find just one verse in the entire bible that says he would come back a long time removed from the first generation or thousands of years in the future. Upon any period of study on this matter I’m sure you will realize that all references to his return say soon, quickly, this generation etc., etc.

Obviously, if he didn’t return soon as the inspired writers promised then the bible wouldn’t be a reliable source of information on any subject such as how to get to heaven, obtain eternal salvation, get sins forgiven or anything else.
Preterism is the only prophetic scheme consistent with the bible being inerrant.

Have a good day.

 

Thomas you just made the Preterist case for me

He that never changes his opinions never corrects his mistakes and will never be wiser on the morrow than he is today….Tryon Edwards 19th century theologian.

Thomas I want to thank you for helping me prove the sterling truth of preterism and expose the hollowed out, disemboweled emptiness of futurism.

You have provided a great example of what futurism is—all commentary and no scripture.

On the one hand you say there are MANY signs of Christ’s coming that are not evident in the first century, but given all these MANY opportunities you can’t provide one, single example from scripture that would stand up to any scrutiny to support your case—that would be because there in fact aren’t any.

On the other hand you say there is another logical interpretation of the time texts, but you can’t actually provide one single example of such other logical interpretations—that would also be because there in fact aren’t any.

I’m calling you out on it Thomas—prove me wrong. If I’m wrong I want to know about it. I want legitimate scripture backed examples that will stand up to a little scrutiny. Please prove me wrong. Futurism is plain and simple a mockery of the inspired words of Christ and the Apostles. Please prove me wrong.

Prove me wrong I want you to—Indeed I dare you to—I just don’t think you got anything. I think you are a total bluff and futurism is a sad, pathetic, laughable joke that has lead its victims astray for 2,000 years and 2 billion years from now will still be laughable, example less, scripture less, and even more viewed as a twisted, mocking of the inspired words of Christ and the Apostles.

 

Don’t be a victim of futurism.

In yet another sterling example of how preterism is proven by actual inspired scripture just look at 2 Thess. 2: 2 when it says not to be upset by a message or letter alleging that the Day of the Lord has come.

Here is obvious that the Thessalonians understand that the Day of the Lord is not a time ending, world ending event and somehow they missed the end of the world. LOL, LOL.

It’s clear they know every eye won’t literally see Jesus come back riding on a literal cloud in a physical manner.

It’s indisputable they realize that the coming of the Lord could happen and it not be physically evident that the event had happened.

Further, when Paul tells them that the event hasn’t happened yet he doesn’t tell them they are wrong that it will be the end of time and the end of the world—if they were wrong obviously he would have corrected their understanding of the nature of the Day of the Lord.

They clearly understand the nature of the return of Christ they just didn’t get timing of the event right.

Further in 1 Thess. 4:14 For we say this to you by a revelation from the Lord: We who are still alive at the Lord’s coming will certainly have no advantage over those who have fallen asleep.

Notice Paul says by Revelation from the Lord we who are still alive—he is talking present tense, writing to a contemporary audience in that generation. He is not saying a future generation, people who live after us or any other such futuristic nonsense which mocks the words of the Lord. So either the Lord came back in their generation or they are still alive today. Anybody want to vote on the latter?

Here we have in on revelation from the Lord—inspired holy verses that Christ came back in the lives of the first century saints. Any other rendering is pure mockery of the words of Christ.

Lesson to take away from this example from scripture—don’t be a victim of futurism which disputes the very words of Christ. Futurism leads its victims down a road which is in direct conflict, total disagreement, mockery, and blasphemy against the very words of Christ.

 

LOL. I don’t blame you a bit Thomas. If I was in your shoes trying to defend the undefendable chaos of futurism I would do the same thing. Believe me I’ve looked the scriptures over high and low and I can’t find any defense for it either.

The only difference between you and me (I use to be as big a dispy as anybody ever was) is that when I realized the Apostles were preterists I decided to align my position with them instead of trying to wiggle their position to fit mine.

I’m sure in time you will want to make that decision as well.

Have a good day Thomas.

 

Chuckles my friend, I would ask you to give me some pointers on reading and study, but you don't seem to be able to provide any scripture whatsoever to support your own view. I suggest you try reading the bible from a preterist perspective and you will be amazed at how it suddenly comes into complete harmony instead of having such tension and conflict as when you do the futurist thing and see Jesus say he is coming in this generation or there are some standing here that shall not die before his return and then have to torture the scripture beyond recognition to pretend it means His return thousands of years in the future. You my friend are a victim of futurism--free yourself instead of being enslaved to your preconceived notions that have been wrong for 2,000 years and get more wrong every day.

 

Don’t be a victim of futurism II

Luke 21: 20-24 ESV

Jesus Foretells Destruction of Jerusalem

20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, 22 for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. 23 Alas for women who are pregnant and for those who are nursing infants in those days! For there will be great distress upon the earth and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Note verse 22 says to fulfill all that is written. This happens when Jerusalem is destroyed. The Roman war against the Jews which culminated in the destruction of the Jerusalem and the temple and brought the Old Covenant to a close lasted 3.5 years or as the bible says The time, times, and half a time.

Hence we know that Christ had to come back not to end the world or time but His coming back was in judgment against Jerusalem since as verse 22 says to fulfill all that is written at the time Jerusalem is destroyed. This would positively and totally rule out any coming of Jesus in the future that could be predicted in the bible since there is no mentioning of Jerusalem being rebuilt after 70 AD to be destroyed again.

All that was written including His second coming so to speak would have to have been fulfilled in 70 AD. To dispute that point is to blasphemy the inspired scripture and very words of Christ.

Don’t be a victim of futurism.

 

Of things stiff-necked and scriptural or lack thereof

All of us need to be constantly asking ourselves what it is which we want to be true and whether our desires so to believe are stronger than our desires to know the truth however uncongenial to us that truth may be. Antony Flew

Sir Thomas I haven’t brought the HS or your standing with the elect into this conversation. I’m sure when we meet on the over side in the great beyond we will be best of friends and you will then finally be a preterist too (if not before then) and I’m not going to remind you that I got there first.

I know all about dispies be stiff-necked I use to be that way when I was a dispy too. But when I found out about John Darby and dispies getting their start in the 1800s I couldn’t put devotion to my preconceived notions ahead of seeking truth in the Lord.

When I read the bible honestly just seeking truth no matter where that journey took me there was just no honest way to read the scriptures and not realize the Apostles who were guided by the Holy Spirit believed and wrote and taught that Christ’s return would be in their generation. No one who reads their words honestly can come to a different conclusion. I decided it was time for me to get with the Apostle’s program and be a preterist too.

Reading the bible that way provided so much more clarity and harmony than reading it like a dispy. I’m grateful the Holy Spirit lead my searching to such satisfying answers—which no one has been able to dispute based on scripture yet—but if you want to try go ahead. I’ll read your posts.

So far your MO has not been to put up a scripture based argument, but to deny, deny, deny. I’d love for you to find some way to find any biblical truth in your argument to convince me with, but you seem reconciled to not being able to find any and just dig in your heels on your preconceived, stiff-necked notions without even being able to point to why you believe them from a scriptural stand point.

Prove me wrong!

 

Don’t be a victim of futurism III

As a preterist Zechariah is a book that is a joy to read. But instead of culling out a few verses to take out of context let’s focus more on the end chapters as a whole.

Obviously Zechariah ch 12-14 focuses on a battle at Jerusalem. Is it past or future. One quick fact assures us without question that it has to be past to us and invalidates the whole notion that it could possibly be in the future.

Anything that pertains to the Jewish people, Jerusalem, the temple, Israel as a nation, etc., etc is a convention of the Old Covenant and can only exist in the Old Covenant therefore we know the battle at Jerusalem spoken of in Zechariah would have to take place no later than when the Old Covenant existed and it ended completely with the destruction of the temple in 70 AD therefore the latest date this prophecy could have possibly been fulfilled is 70 AD. That is a given.

There is so much to say in regard to Zechariah but for the sake of time tonight I won’t cover all of it. First does the bible really say God will fight on behalf of the Jews or not.

Look at verse 12:14

This will be the plague the LORD strikes all the peoples with, who have warred against Jerusalem: their flesh will rot while they stand on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths. HCSV

At first glance with one of the modern translations that seems to be the case, but ahh—not so fast.

Lets look at this verse in a Hebrew Interlinear bible and instead of saying the people who have warred against Jerusalem it says the people which they muster on Jerusalem. On has emphasis as on top of or pressing down on.

Obviously this is not referring to those fighting against the Jew, but the Jews who are in Jerusalem. Further the flesh, tongues, and eyes rotting is a good description of starvation which is exactly what was happening to the people in Jerusalem.

Which view is consistent with the bible? If you put the fulfillment thousand years in the future you have stepped outside the time guidelines provided for Christ’s return since every reference is soon, shortly, this generation etc ; however, 70 AD is within the time statements in the bible given for Christ’s return.

Splitting mountains –basic apocalyptic language found all over the Old Testament. In the interest of brevity I’ll leave it at that for now.

Fought against those nations that are fighting against Israel. If you read a more literal translation like Darby it says fight with those nations. Obviously fight with can mean ally with those nations. Read this way it is consistent with the time statements and the balance of Zechariah.

Much more could be added to the preterist case here, but I’ll stop here since this post is a bit long already.

Don’t be a victim of futurism.