Featured Tracing the Origins of Coming on the Clouds

My Kingdom for a Stradivarius

So much righteous indignation is music to my ears—the reason there is so much of it and no bible verses to support futurism is to deflect attention from the fact that futurists have no verses to support their position of a coming of Christ in our future and no verses that support a physical coming either. Not one verse of scripture to bolster their position so they are left attacking those who don’t agree with them. Maestro could we get a Stradivarius to accompany this whining.

I’ll start with you OR,

I personally love John’s attire. I think he looks very cute in it. I hope he keeps that picture up for all time.

And, I can wax indignant too OR—I’m proud to call John my Young Padawan and stand by him as he grows and develops his biblical skills under my scripture supported posts. You may laugh now OR, but just you wait—I’ll develop John into a monster Preterist Jedi all too soon and I’ll unleash him on these bogus and immature futurist’s theories. You’ll see.

In the meantime OR why don’t you show us just one single verse where Christ says He will be a long time coming back or that He will come back in a physical body? If either was true why wouldn’t they be in the bible?
The fact is Christ says he would be coming quickly as in soon.
Rev 22:20 …I am coming quickly.

1 Thel 4:15 We who are still alive when Christ returns

John 18:36 my kingdom is not of this world

And now let the scripture less whining begin—it’s Stradivarius time again.

 

Better late to the party than never

Well John big-time congrats you finally figured out the Young Padawan reference. Some folks thought you would never get a clue—but not me—I had total faith in your ability to eventually figure it out. And, you are a handsome devil in that pic and I like it a lot so please do keep it up.

I salute your martial arts skills.

 

Wishful thinking does not make logic

My dear young Padawan we might need to spend some more time on our logic lesson.

What constitutes logical syllogisms for futurists is merely imputing your own meaning onto a verse. If this was a legit way to view the verse then the balance of the bible would support it; however, the opposite is true. No verse anywhere says Christ will return in a physical body.

 

You make this too easy my young Padawan

Since the book of Revelation was written a few years before 70 AD even by your own definition of quickly it would only be a few years until His return in judgment in 70 AD. (Don’t waste time trying to say Revelation was written after 70 AD—Tom has bested you in that discussion every time you drudge it up)

It is you my young Padawan who has no answer for all those instances in the bible where other issues are being addressed beside the specific timing of Christ’s return and those events each and every one confirm that His coming and the end of the age are near such as Hebrews 8:13 When it says “new, it makes the first obsolete. And if something is old and outdated, it’s close to disappearing.”

You notice the timing here also confirms that the old covenant is in its last days.

Or Hebrews 10:25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.

Or Hebrews 10:37 Yet a little while, and the coming one will come and will not delay;

1 Cor 7:29 This is what I mean, brothers: the appointed time has grown very short. From now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none,

Wouldn’t you have to agree how amazing it is that all these little indirect references to the timing of Christ’s return sprinkled all through the bible that are dealing with other issues all support the preterist view that Christ is coming soon and not a single one of them supports a far off coming of Christ or the futurist view.

 

If Christ meant a physical return why isn't there even 1 verse that says physical

 

Bible verses prove you have tiackwards

Once again John you are hoisted on your own petard—you can’t find a verse that supports your fanciful claim—just your twisted, tortured view of scripture. I have actual bible verses.

1 Corinthians 15:50 tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. And need I remind you about John 18:36 His Kingdom not being of this world.

You are left to surmise your own scheme for your claims and I quote bible verses.

 

I may have to start calling you no verses John since you don't use bible verses

John your dating attempts at Revelation are child's play to brush aside. In regards to Tom--he has so many post I'll let you look it up and not bother myself to look through all the fine work he has done here. I'm sure you have more time for such things than I do.

There are a few problems with your attempts at dating revelation to the 90's. I can quote plenty of sources that put it in the 60's and even though more people think it is in the 90's today that was not always the case--if you go back a few hundred years more people thought it was in the 60's. It changes over time and is not set.

It doesn't prove anything for us to get into a contest as to who can make a longer laundry list of who thinks it was written when. That can go on forever and in the end doesn’t prove anything. A better way is what does the internal evidence in the book of Revelation itself indicate--and that all points to an early date.

Since you are so fond of making trivial list here is mine--just to make the point I'll post one more reference than you did:

George Ladd, A commentary on Revelation
Steve Gregg Revelation: Four Views
A. T. Robinson Redating the New Testament
A. N. Wilson, Paul: The Mind of the Apostle
Robert Jamieson, A.R. Fausset & David Brown; Commentary Critical and Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible
Robert Young: Concise Critical Comments on the Holy Bible

And here is some of the internal evidence that is the real meat of the argument--none of which is on your side I might add:

1. Revelation says the events must soon take place--if it is written in the 60's then the destruction of Jerusalem is near at hand. If it is written in the 90's no historical events were near at hand.

2. There is no mention of the destruction of the temple. Since Jesus prophesized its destruction no Apostle writing Revelation would fail to mention how Christ's prophecy had been fulfilled in such sweeping fashion.

3. In Chapter 11 John is sent to measure the temple which bears witness to the fact that the temple is still standing at the time of the writing. In the 90's there is no temple to go measure since it was destroyed in 70 AD

4. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 indicate the Judaizers are persecuting the churches. This is consistent with all the bible verses telling of how the Jewish leaders are persecuting the Christians.

5. Revelation 2:2 speaks of other apostles indicating that not only John, but some of the other apostles are still alive at the time of the writing since it is plural--futurists point to tradition that claims all the other apostle, but John were dead by the 90's so this would force an earlier dating.

Again just like an all the other areas where you don't have a verse to stand on such as a long-time in the waiting future coming of Christ and no verses to actually say he is coming in a physical or literal way you don't have any internal verses that support you either.

Futurism runs of fumes of verses. Preterism runs on high octane when it comes to actual scripture.

I don't blame you for just ignoring my post from yesterday--you don't have any scripture verses to make your case with either from a future to us coming or a physical coming. And, today you just dug the proverbial hole deeper by letting me illustrate how the internal evidence of Revelation all supports the early dating.

Thank you my Young Padawan--you do make me look good.

 

Thanks for your help Herald

LOL, Futurists--they are all insults and no verses to support their bankrupt ideas. Of course when the Holy Scriptures don't provide any verses to make your point with that leaves you only insults to work with. It's not really your fault so I don't take umbrage. In fact I appreciate your dropping by to insult me because it proves the total truthfulness of preterism and the deception of futurism.

Thank you my good fellow.

 

I got a warm fuzzy

What more insults and still no verses--makes me feel smug--you guys just line up to make me look good and I thank you for it yet again pointing out that futurism lives off of false ideas and shuck and jive torturing of verses. But you can't point out a single verse to make your point that I don't make you look silly with--sorry, but somebody has got to do it.

Live is tough as a futurist alright.

 

Waitress, could I have some more insults please

LOL—yet more proof that preterism is the only correct interpretation of prophecy. OR I look forward to seeing you lob an insult grenade my way every day. I put up scripture daily (as you well know) and you never challenge any of it with counter scripture because there is not any to put up.

So far in this thread we’ve seen that:

1. “coming on the clouds” has never meant a literal body flying through the sky.

2. There is no scripture that states Christ will be coming back a long time in the future.

3. All scripture agrees Christ would return soon.

4. There is not one verse of scripture that says Christ will return in a physical body.

5. The internal verses of Revelation all support the early dating of its writing before 70 AD.

6. John has mistakenly used a logical syllogism to try and cheat a physical return into existence. That has given me a great idea for a response—so good I’m not going to bury it deep in this thread, but when I get ready I’ll point out its fallacy in a new thread.

And you kind sir haven’t even attempted a serious, scriptural rebuttal to any of it. Could it be because you can’t find verses to rebut it?

It the same broken record every day—just deny it’s true, say it’s sacrilegious, scream immature, childish, snotty, yada, yada.

I take it all as proof positive that you are speechless in the face of the truth and vindication of the ultimate superiority of
preterism.

Thank you for you insults—may I have some more please!

 

It would take better than this to rattle me

Very weak attempt at insulting on all accounts--put some heart in it OR--I was hoping better from you, LOL, LOL, LOL