Interesting Quote

[agedman]

Yes, that is my understanding. I could be wrong but I have not seen a passage that would teach otherwise.

But God is not obligated to tell us everything future, like that verse in Deut. tells us - secret things belong to Him.

Moreover, intriguingly, we do have the things spoken by the Seven Thunders that John was forbidden to write down.

Really????

Certainly you must have read:

1Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.
​

Btw, the "seven thunders" that John was told to seal can certainly be considered in the same relevance as Daniel's words were sealed.

1) They are words of great calamitous for the ungodly but kept from the Godly less they become discouraged and dismayed just as Daniel's sealed words.
2) They are words which those who have ears will understand when God allows the revealing, for there will be nothing hidden from the Godly when we shall know as we are known.
3) There are events in history hidden, sealed, from the eyes of the church that as history unfolds the (at the present growing apostate) church looks for their only sustenance and preservation in the strength of Christ.
4) The question of "what is behind that closed door" has always been an enticement for speculation in humans. If they were given every statement proclaiming all future events, then what would intrigue them to consider and ponder further?
​

It is important to trust that the thunders will be revealed just as Daniel's words were revealed.

The following is purely my own speculation and others should not use it as some indication held with any substance from Scriptures. But, just as the prophecy of Daniel was sealed until the appropriate time of revelation to the church, so too are these thunders. Imo, they shall when necessary be revealed to the believers in such a way as to declare what is necessary for the believers in that time, place and need.

However, in Luke 12 and 8 there is this statement,

1Under these circumstances, after so many thousands of people had gathered together that they were stepping on one another, He began saying to His disciples first of all, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. 2“But there is nothing covered up that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known. 3“Accordingly, whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in the inner rooms will be proclaimed upon the housetops.

16“Now no one after lighting a lamp covers it over with a container, or puts it under a bed; but he puts it on a lampstand, so that those who come in may see the light. 17“For nothing is hidden that will not become evident, nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light. 18“So take care how you listen; for whoever has, to him more shall be given; and whoever does not have, even what he thinks he has shall be taken away from him.”
​

Knowing that the context of the first is about hypocrisy and the second about covering up sin, does not prevent the statement from being applicable to revealing ALL deceitfulness as deceitful. This could actually be the use of the thunders as God opens the understanding of the nations to disclose all the deviousness of history and humankind.

Ultimately, the thunders shall be revealed and disclosed, in God's timing.

 

[agedman]

I'm sure you weren't taught this is VBS. What was the one thing that convinced you? I know there will be more than one, but if you're like a normal man, you considered multiple things and one thing made them fall into place.

For instance, my true and complete surrender to (what is called) Calvinism came when I was mowing one very hot and humid day, struggling with doubts and fears and Ephesians 2:8 was brought to mind.

What convinced you of your position?

Be careful, the non-cal folks will jump on this claiming you had a heat-stroke seizure of the mind!

.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

If I may add my own questions,
In your view, will this Earth continue to add to the heavenly host into infinite?

Yes, that is my understanding. I could be wrong but I have not seen a passage that would teach otherwise.

Isaiah 51:6. 'Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look at the earth beneath.
For the heavens will vanish away like smoke,
The earth will grow old like a garment and those who dwell in it will die in like manner;
But My salvation will be forever, and My righteousness will not be abolished.'

 

[asterisktom]

I'm sure you weren't taught this is VBS. What was the one thing that convinced you? I know there will be more than one, but if you're like a normal man, you considered multiple things and one thing made them fall into place.

For instance, my true and complete surrender to (what is called) Calvinism came when I was mowing one very hot and humid day, struggling with doubts and fears and Ephesians 2:8 was brought to mind.

What convinced you of your position?

First of all I am not 100 percent convinced that the world will go on forever, just maybe 90 to 95 percent. Compared to my Preterism and belief in the Doctrines of Grace - beliefs which I am now pretty sure of - there is still a little sliver of uncertainty on the issue of the earths lasting forever. But, as I wrote, I have not seen any passage that goes against the world continuing forever. None of the verses offered recently change that.

Yes, many things did work together. Hard to say what the one thing would be. Certainly wasnt from reading any extra-biblical book or website. It just sort of snuck up on me in my Bible studies, especially as certain verses came into clearer focus.

Sorry to give a vague answer. A good question. I will think on it some more.

------------
BTW, one thing that really convinced me of both Calvinism and - later - Preterism was the low quality of responses against those respective beliefs. I was forced to say - with Alice - You are nothing but a deck of cards!

Anti- Calvinist tried to dissuade me with Calvin-the-monster stories and silly mischaracterizations of free-will. And anti-Preterists almost always resort to the evidence of creeds and tradition. But this is beside the point of what you were asking.

 

[Aaron]

First of all I am not 100 percent convinced that the world will go on forever, just maybe 90 to 95 percent. Compared to my Preterism and belief in the Doctrines of Grace - beliefs which I am now pretty sure of - there is still a little sliver of uncertainty on the issue of the earths lasting forever. But, as I wrote, I have not seen any passage that goes against the world continuing forever. None of the verses offered recently change that.

Yes, many things did work together. Hard to say what the one thing would be. Certainly wasnt from reading any extra-biblical book or website. It just sort of snuck up on me in my Bible studies, especially as certain verses came into clearer focus.

Sorry to give a vague answer. A good question. I will think on it some more.

------------
BTW, one thing that really convinced me of both Calvinism and - later - Preterism was the low quality of responses against those respective beliefs. I was forced to say - with Alice - You are nothing but a deck of cards!

Anti- Calvinist tried to dissuade me with Calvin-the-monster stories and silly mischaracterizations of free-will. And anti-Preterists almost always resort to the evidence of creeds and tradition. But this is beside the point of what you were asking.

Just consider this:

God has a finite number of elect that He knew before the foundation of the earth. Once that last sheep is brought into the fold, it's over.

2Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

 

[asterisktom]

Really????

Certainly you must have read:

1Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.

​

Yes, I read it. In a book full of metaphors and symbolism. You are free to literalize whatever you want but that hardly constitutes proof.​

Btw, the "seven thunders" that John was told to seal can certainly be considered in the same relevance as Daniel's words were sealed.

​

Apples and Oranges. Daniel's words were sealed in the OT but revealed in the New. It was still within the time frame of the Word of God. But what the Seven Thunders spoke was in the last book of the Bible. There obviously cannot be further Bible explanation of that.

Unless you want to add to the Word of God...​

 

[asterisktom]

Just consider this:

God has a finite number of elect that He knew before the foundation of the earth. Once that last sheep is brought into the fold, it's over.

2Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

I considered this verse, but do not think it can be totally used for your point. I see this as part of the same context and time as the elements melting with fervent heat, the elements being not physical elements but the basic principles of the previous age - the Jewish Dispensation. So the "us" here had a particular audience relevance as well as a time-stamp.

This is not say that God does not now, on this side of the Parousia, care whether His elect perish or not. The passage is similar to, say, the Great Commission, where Christ told the disciples that He would be with them "to the end of the age", "age" being the Jewish dispensation, which ended when the Temple was destroyed. But Christ is still with us we witness today.

So, IMO, I do not think the passage you cited can be the ironclad proof that the world will end.

 

[Aaron]

I considered this verse, but do not think it can be totally used for your point. I see this as part of the same context and time as the elements melting with fervent heat, the elements being not physical elements but the basic principles of the previous age - the Jewish Dispensation. So the "us" here had a particular audience relevance as well as a time-stamp.

This is not say that God does not now, on this side of the Parousia, care whether His elect perish or not. The passage is similar to, say, the Great Commission, where Christ told the disciples that He would be with them "to the end of the age", "age" being the Jewish dispensation, which ended when the Temple was destroyed. But Christ is still with us we witness today.

So, IMO, I do not think the passage you cited can be the ironclad proof that the world will end.

But it is awfully hard to reconcile with your presumptions.

As is the comparison of the final judgment to the judgment in the days of Noah. The judgment upon the earth in the days of Noah, wasn't about basic principles. Neither was the judgment on Sodom, Gomorrah, Tyre, Sidon, Pompeii, Herculaneum, etc. The judgment in the days of Noah was global, and the coming judgment will be as it was in the days of Noah. Life going on merrily until the last of the elect got into the Ark, then *boom* the world that then was was destroyed.

Christ didn't say, As it was in the days of Moses, or Elijah, or Josiah, where systems and paradigms were violently confronted and reformed.

He said as it was in the days of Noah, when God brought violent judgment upon the entire earth, and destroyed the world that then was. Only this time, the heavens will also pass away.

 

[asterisktom]

But it is awfully hard to reconcile with your presumptions.

As is the comparison of the final judgment to the judgment in the days of Noah. The judgment upon the earth in the days of Noah, wasn't about basic principles. Neither was the judgment on Sodom, Gomorrah, Tyre, Sidon, Pompeii, Herculaneum, etc. The judgment in the days of Noah was global, and the coming judgment will be as it was in the days of Noah. Life going on merrily until the last of the elect got into the Ark, then *boom* the world that then was was destroyed.

Christ didn't say, As it was in the days of Moses, or Elijah, or Josiah, where systems and paradigms were violently confronted and reformed.

He said as it was in the days of Noah, when God brought violent judgment upon the entire earth, and destroyed the world that then was. Only this time, the heavens will also pass away.

Whenever the Bible makes comparisons one always has to ask what is being compared. If this is not done, then, often a wrong application is made. Consider I Cor. 15:22

For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ will all be made alive.

There are some universalists who appeal to this verse to prove that all will eventually be saved, the logic being that since the first "all" refers to all of humanity then the second must too. But that is not the reason for the comparison in Corinthians.

Neither is the whole scope of humanity the point of comparison in your "days of Noah" verse. Rather it is the suddenness of judgment and unpreparedness of the ones soon to be judged. To bear this out you just have to read the context. There is no mention of a worldwide judgment. In fact, throughout Matthew 24 and 25 there are markers that limit the application to the Jews and to that current generation.

But now I have a question for you. I am clear that you do not see the "elements" as "basic principles". What do you see them to be - actual elements - contrary to all other biblical uses of the term?

 

[Yeshua1]

Whenever the Bible makes comparisons one always has to ask what is being compared. If this is not done, then, often a wrong application is made. Consider I Cor. 15:22

For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ will all be made alive.

There are some universalists who appeal to this verse to prove that all will eventually be saved, the logic being that since the first "all" refers to all of humanity then the second must too. But that is not the reason for the comparison in Corinthians.

Neither is the whole scope of humanity the point of comparison in your "days of Noah" verse. Rather it is the suddenness of judgment and unpreparedness of the ones soon to be judged. To bear this out you just have to read the context. There is no mention of a worldwide judgment. In fact, throughout Matthew 24 and 25 there are markers that limit the application to the Jews and to that current generation.

But now I have a question for you. I am clear that you do not see the "elements" as "basic principles". What do you see them to be - actual elements - contrary to all other biblical uses of the term?

Armagedden seems to be worldwide, eh?

 

[Aaron]

But now I have a question for you. I am clear that you do not see the "elements" as "basic principles". What do you see them to be - actual elements - contrary to all other biblical uses of the term?

It's used here in the same manner as the "heavens," and as it's obviously used, meaning material things.

All Christian instruction on this earth teaches us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.

You say that Day has come. You're wrong, and if you won't yield to the Scriptures, how much less will you yield to my words.

Maybe yield to the testimony of your own marriage. Marriage doesn't exist in the Resurrection. It is a present worldly thing.

 

[asterisktom]

It's used here in the same manner as the "heavens," and as it's obviously used, meaning material things.

Not at all obvious. If a word is used in a certain way in all verses except, supposedly, one the possibility remains that that one should also be translated the same way as the rest.

All Christian instruction on this earth teaches us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.

Just because a verse was in the future tense does not mean it is still future to us now. By the same logic I can quote verses to prove the future Virgin Birth or Crucifixion as an article of faith.

You say that Day has come. You're wrong, and if you won't yield to the Scriptures, how much less will you yield to my words.

Ironic and uncalled for, brother. The Scriptures - and them alone, not creeds or consensus or peer pressure - have convinced me of my position. I have lost friends, ministries in churches, employments because of this. But I cannot deny what I am convinced of.

Maybe yield to the testimony of your own marriage. Marriage doesn't exist in the Resurrection. It is a present worldly thing.

This last point needs a separate post, but I have typed enough for now on this phone.

 

[asterisktom]

No, not worldwde. But that would be a good, separate thread.

 

[Aaron]

Ironic and uncalled for, brother. The Scriptures - and them alone, not creeds or consensus or peer pressure - have convinced me of my position. I have lost friends, ministries in churches, employments because of this. But I cannot deny what I am convinced of.

Is there any promise of the NT yet to come?

 

[Aaron]

I have not seen any passage that goes against the world continuing forever.

2 Corinthians 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

There ya go. If you can see it with your natural eyes, it ain't here forever.

 

[asterisktom]

2 Corinthians 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

There ya go. If you can see it with your natural eyes, it ain't here forever.

OK, good point to consider.

Then that would apply to us also. And to Jesus. So much for visible bodies of flesh and blood, however constituted.

 

[asterisktom]

Is there any promise of the NT yet to come?

"It is given unto men once and then the judgment."

We all will still meet God.

 

[Aaron]

OK, good point to consider.

Then that would apply to us also. And to Jesus. So much for visible bodies of flesh and blood, however constituted.

Lol. A jab at the Resurrection again. Our bodies are sown temporal, but raised eternal.

I figured there might be some objection, so here is another to consider:

Hebrews 12:26-27 Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.

and

2 Peter 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

 

[asterisktom]

Lol. A jab at the Resurrection again.

I take this topic very seriously, thinking carefully on what I write. The resurrection is key to our new life in Christ, and to our own resurrection.

However, His resurrection is not like ours in several ways. We shall be like Him - the other way around. He Himself said we would be "like the angels".

His taking on flesh, the "form of a servant", was part of the humiliation involved in His mission to save us. He is not humiliated now.

His taking in flesh was in order to save those who were in the flesh, as Hebrews tells us.

I figured there might be some objection, so here is another to consider:

Hebrews 12:26-27 Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.

and

2 Peter 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

I'm not jabbing, just answering. As for the other verses, they fall under the New Heavens and New Earth topic discussed earlier.

The judgment and perdition are real but it is important to recognize metaphorical language.

I could several OT apocalytic passages that you would probably recognize as metaphorical. It is in the nature of the genre. Do apocalyptic passages in the NT not have similar usage?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I take this topic very seriously, thinking carefully on what I write. The resurrection is key to our new life in Christ, and to our own resurrection.

However, His resurrection is not like ours in several ways. We shall be like Him - the other way around. He Himself said we would be "like the angels".

We shall be like the angels in heaven insofar as we shall not marry or be given in marriage (Matt. 22:30 tc.). The text does not say that we shall not have physical bodies, for that would contradict 1 Cor. 15.

His taking on flesh, the "form of a servant", was part of the humiliation involved in His mission to save us. He is not humiliated now.

No indeed, but in glory He is still 'like a Son of man' (Daniel 7:13).

His taking in flesh was in order to save those who were in the flesh, as Hebrews tells us.

Indeed it was, and His return 'in like manner' (Acts 1:11), when 'Every eye shall see Him' will be to bring this present world to an end

I'm not jabbing, just answering. As for the other verses, they fall under the New Heavens and New Earth topic discussed earlier.

The judgment and perdition are real but it is important to recognize metaphorical language.

To sat that 'the heavens and the new earth = the Jews' is not metaphorical; it is a dismal attempt at allegory. It fails because there is no point of contact between the one and the other.

The Jews did not disappear in AD 70, nor did their opposition to the Christians. According to F.F. Bruce, curses upon the Christians as part of the Jewish liturgy did not begin until around AD 90. The Jewish Priesthood survived certainly until AD 136.

The destruction of the Temple was not a unique event because it had happened before under Nebuchadnezzar.

The end of the sacrificial system did not occur in AD 70, but at the cross where our Lord offered one sufficient and acceptable sacrifice for all time. The destruction of the Temple was effectively a dead tree finally keeling over in a gale.

The trials of the Jewish people, as described in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 were not completed in AD 70. They continued down the years and reached their zenith (if that's the right word) in WW 2.

In short, AD 70 is simply not the climax of history that Hyper-preterists require it to be.