Featured 5 reasons why the Preterist and/or semi-preterist position is impossible

Yes, He is, even to mockers who have a bad attitude and seek to cover their corrupt language by the use of initials.

You never did attempt to answer my points in the O.P. That's because you can't.

P.S. Enjoy your time in the can with OR.:wavey:

P.S.S. "earth, wind, and fire'...three of the five points of witchcraft power (earth, wind, fire, water, and spirit).

 

Thanks again for your opinions, Hank.

There is a big difference in the expression 'cow dung' as inspired by the Holy Spirit than the meaning of the words he was using which was pure slang. He knows it.

But he/they don't care about your assurances nor do they care about the real truth of this matter, neither biblically nor historically. So, quite honestly I would rather communicate with those who are at least open to the truth and not waste time on those whose minds have been run through a ringer by some extremist 'scholar' who was adept at leading people away from common sense doctrines of the Bible as it concerns prophecy.

The preterist position is horrible and they are even worse on prophecy than the Watchtower in all of its ugly, twisted notions about the coming of the Lord.

Best wishes and keep hanging in there for the Lord.:flower:

 

What? Where did I say otherwise? Here is my reply...

So? Of course there are many antichrists but only one that the entire world will wonder after and enforce the mark of the 'beast' with the number 666 placed upon the right hand and/or the foreheads of every citizen who complies with his demands.(Rev. 13)

How about this from one who seems to hold a similar view?

Here’s the quote from Adversus Haereses by Irenaeus regarding the date of the book of Revelation in the context of the Apostle John’s life:

“We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For [it or he] was seen not very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.”

– Saint Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 5, 30, 3

I went and checked the Greek text preserved by Eusebius and it’s ambiguous. The part about “being seen” could be translated in three ways:

Option #1
For it, that is the vision, was seen not very long ago, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.

Option #2
For it, that is the written book, was seen not very long ago, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.

Option #3
For he, that is the Apostle John, was seen no very long ago, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.


Those three quotes, no matter which one you choose, cannot help your position.

http://taylormarshall.com/2008/09/irenaeus-on-date-of-book-of-revelation.html

The time from the viewpoint of heaven's perspective is far different from our perception of time on earth.

Are you absolutely kidding me? Quote: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book..." Revelation 22:18.

You won't even believe the plainly revealed words of John in Revelation much less the confirmed timing of its writing.

That is an utter untruth and you did not establish that ANY of the prophecies I mentioned above (the 7 seals, 7 trumpets, 7 vials of wrath, the 3 woes,etc.) actually happened in or about A.D. 70. That's because you cannot.

Are you a 'partial preterist'? Define it for us.

No, because the promise that Messiah will sit on the throne of David (Isa. 9:6-7) has not been fulfilled.That throne will be ON EARTH for a thousand years...and while He reigns there death, famine, and curses will still exist: Isaiah 65:19-20. But there is no death, nor curse in heaven. So his reign on the throne of David cannot be in heaven.

Your arguments are more than 'pretty weak' stuff in my opinion. It amounts to an outright denial of both the scriptural past and the scriptural future of our world.

 

No they haven't. Not one of them.

But rather than just tooting your horn why don't you involve yourself in 'answering' what was said...both in the O.P. and what you just quoted.

 

No, there have been sorry attempts using twisted logic by people who were influenced by perterist 'scholars' who don't have a clue about timing, prophetic fulfillment and details which make for a huge difference in determining conclusions about prophecy. Quite frankly, it's pitiful.

Stop with the condescending attitude. All positions on preterism are adequately described in such places as

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism

https://www.probe.org/four-views-of-revelation/

...and I have been studying prophetic issues for over 30 years including the preterist positions.

But it hasn't happened YET. Those kingdoms still exist and have not been brought down...YET.

No, it is not ancient Rome...it is the revived Roman Empire of the coming world dictator. That empire is described as two legs and ten toes. You left that out of the picture. Daniel was not wrong. You are.

I just did, by two of the ancient church fathers who indicated that John died during the time of Domitian, A.D. 96.

I don't 'see Antichrist everywhere'. He hasn't come yet and I do not know who he is. Furthermore you are flat wrong about I John:

Quote: "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. I John 2:18.

Do you know the difference between singular (ἀντίχριστος) and plural (ἀντίχριστοι)?

That's human opinions and spiritual truth is not determined by them.

It doesn't really make any difference if Revelation was written during or before A.D. 70 because the prophecies (7 seals, 7 trumpets, 7 vials of wrath, 3 woes, Antichrist, 666, world government and an entire world affected by all of that and NOT just the Roman Empire. What happened in A.D. 70 was not even known by most of the rest of the world until months and/or years later. At the end, the entire planet will be affected and not just Israel and Rome.

You won't win anything. There is no 'forced' literal interpretation. Every single symbol of scripture stands for something real, including the devils that come out of the pit in Rev. 9 that look like locusts with scorpion stingers that will torment men for five months during the tribulation. If you don't think that was literal then tell the readers just what it meant. Please don't miss this point because I want to see your reply.

The trouble is that those of your persuasion treat the scriptures like a rubber band that you can stretch or shrink any way you can in order to perserve your unbelief about what it really says.

He was wrong, just like you are. That's a crazy interpretation that has no merit.

For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth (restrains) will let(restrain), until he be taken out of the way.

That is almost certainly the Holy Spirit holding back the completion of Antichrists coming kindgom...not some pagan emperor persecuting the Jews.

Christ did not...return! He is sitting on the throne of glory now...but He will sit upon the throne of David after His second coming (Isa. 9:6-7) AND that has to be an earthly throne over an earthly kingdom because Isaiah tells us that while He reigns there were be death, curses, and famine, & new moons. Isa. 65:20, 66:22-23, Zech. 14:17.But there is no death in heaven and no curse. There will be no 'new moon' in the eternal reign, in fact, no moon at all.

Yet, as I just quoted from Isaiah....the first stage of that 'new heavens and new earth' will include death and curses. Read it for yourself. That refers to the coming millenial kingdom and not to the eternal state that comes later in perfection (no death, no curse, no sun, nor moon).

You are so confused. You believe Lightfoot over scripture. For example:

The destruction of Jerusalem was just the BEGINNING of the 'days of vengeance'....but it proceeded througout history and is still in effect to this day and will be until the visible, literal return of Christ. There will be another destruction of Jerusalem in the future just before Christs second coming and the details of that event are found in Zechariah 12...

Quote: And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. vs 9.

Friend, that DID NOT happen in A.D. 70 for the Romans were not crushed by the Lord and He did not appear visibly as John said he would (Rev. 1:7).

Your sense of timing is very poor.

You, friend, are playing fast and loose with scripture and that is very, very inappropriate and leads to serious error ...and as I mentioned, unbelief.

 

'Dispies'...well, I see the contempt. But that attitude will change the very moment Jesus returns for His bride as he promised; at the midnight hour (Matt. 25). Your attitude does nothing to engender respect for your position.

No, that is not true. How many times must we present their views that clearly say otherwise for you to understand that they expected the coming of the Lord for his people BEFORE the terrible tribulation period to come? But that did not happen in A.D. 70 and the Jews did not repent as Paul told us they will at that time.

And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

Because I quoted TWO....count them: TWO church fathers who mentioned John's death during the reign of Domitian (A.D.) --- PLUS the fact that even if John wrote Revelation during or just before A.D. 70 it doesn't help your cause. Why? Because the prophecies of Revelation were NOT fulfilled during that time. No one has yet proven in this thread that any of the 7 seals, 7 trumpets, 7 vials of wrath, the 3 woes, antichrist, world government, or the 666 mark of the beast has ever happened in world history, let alone the period preceding A.d. 70.

Oh, gee, golly,...I wonder why?:thumbsup:

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

So did the Holy Spirit inspire all scripture as Paul told us or are we all deceived into thinking that everything from Genesis to Revelation is inspired? But what you just said is the second example I have seen in this debate of the unbelief that is a common result in those who promote the preterist view.

'Seems to be"? That's pitifully weak.

By whose rule? Should we believe John or should we believe you? His word on this matter is NOT obscure:

..."the words of the prophecy of this book." vs 10

So? Apocalypse means 'a revealing'. How does that help you? How does that negate what John said about the prophecy in the last chapter? Quite frankly, your position is dishonest and it amounts to unbelief.

No, it is the direct, plain-spoken words of the apostle John that determine such things. Not your 'interpretation'.

You and those of your persuasion are without understanding on this matter. You were told by John what the book is and warned not to add nor to subtract from the prophecies he wrote....but you do it anyway.

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

I have both read them and preached on them for over three decades. I love those prophecies and look forward to their fulfillment with joy.

Four times in the last chapter John tells us that what he wrote is prophecy (vss 9,10, 18,19)and yet you still don't believe it.

All of it is future...with the exception of the first four chapters.

The whole key to this matter is in the throne of David, the promise that Messiah will sit upon the throne of David some day and rule with a government that will have NO END...but... that during that time there will be death, curses, old age, and famine. Isaiah 65, 66, Zechariah 12, & 14. THAT is the death knell to preterism because Jesus has never yet sat on the throne of David in Jerusalem and the fact is that in heaven there is no death, curses, old age, and famine. Therefore, Christ sitting upon the throne of David must be (1) on earth...and (2) yet future.

 

That is an arrogant attitude and I will dismiss it. Telling others that I have 30 years of experience in studying this matter only suggests that I am not a novice and/or unfamiliar with the subject. But your attitude is so horrible you won't even grant me that much.

Then why did you bother?

Those three decades of careful study and comparisons in scripture did much to lock that door to the unbelief of preterism. As far as I am concerned it is just as evil as Watchtower theology.

'snobbish pontification' is purely in your imagination. Why the personal attack? I did not do this to you nor to your comrades. The only thing I did was to call a spade a spade, nothing more.

Jesus upbraided his disciples for their unbelief. But you don't like being upbraided for the same thing.

Then you might advise your companions that they have the option of not reading mine. I had five original points. But I could have had about twenty with no problem.