More about eschatology and preterism...

Well you would say that because you have been taught that.

However, when Paul wrote in 2 Thess. 2 He was basing his teaching on that chapter.

The coming kingdom of Christ will destroy the world empire system, including the Roman government. Still in place but much weaker now since 1870 and more particularly since the Reformation. The Roman Antichrist, the Papacy will be destroyed by the "Brightness of His Coming".

OK let's consider that prophecy in more detail and look at what scripture actually says, and parts that are fulfilled, in history.

• 7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.

I agree with most commentators that this is Rome. Its weapons were Iron with which it conquered the other empires. It was different from all those before it. The previous empires were recognised animals the Roman beast was not described except as dreadful and terrible.

Verse 17 there are four kings, or kingdoms. Only four. There is no kingdom of Antichrist. There are just Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome.

• 19Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet;
• 20And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.
• 21I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
• 22Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.
• 23Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.
• 24And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
• 25And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
• 26But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.
• 27And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.
• 28Hitherto is the end of the matter. As for me Daniel, my cogitations much troubled me, and my countenance changed in me: but I kept the matter in my heart.

The Bible says that God changes the times and seasons, Daniel 2:2 But the little horn thinks to change times and laws. He introduced many laws that are against God. Changed the ten commandments, or one of them. He changed the passover into Easter. We have a papal calendar, The Gregorian, and many others.

The Ten Horns were the ten kings or kingdoms that overthrew the Western Empire. The Heruli, Suevi, Burgundians, Huns, Ostrogoths, Visigoths,Vasndals, Lombards, Franks, and Saxons.

The three that fell were the Heruli, the Ostrogoths, and Vandals between 493 and 553.

The little horn had eyes. It was an overseer, or Bishop. Rome is called THE HOLY SEE.

He would make war with the saints. Over centuries the papacy has made war on the saints and tried to exterminate all true believers. Truly wearing down the saints of the most high.He would be diverse from the other horns as he not only claimed his kingdom is over heaven, earth and hell, but that he was the only way to God. What can be more antichrist than that?

There is plenty more but just getting ready to go to our evening service.

 

I was making a joke, since he repeats to the letter every time he responds.

 

They built tools with tools?

 

They are recorded quite well. In the bible and through historians. You CHOOSE to not believe it.

 

This is a very interesting way to look at it. Im not sure how much I believe of this view point at the moment, because I don't know much about it.

 

Seriously? Have you ever read War with the Jews?

 

You do not attend correctly to the context.

Chapter 6 is written to INDIVIDUAL church members

1Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? 2Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world?

11Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

12All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything.

17But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him. 18Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body.19Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? 20For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.

​

Certainly there are times when the “you” can be taken as “everyone of a group.” But that “you” use in this letter is ALWAYS reflective of the work first done in the individual “you.”

This foolishness, that some have attempted to publish, that chapter 6 is addressing the “you” as the corporate church and not to be individually applied, is just so very wrong.

As the individuals assemble together, as a great watchmaker assembles a mighty time piece in which each individual member part must function in harmony and support of each other individual part, is consistent with Paul’s letter.

The inconsistentency that denies the authority of the purposed work of salvation aligned with specific ministry gift of each believer cannot stand. It is the individual responsibility emphasis of which Paul carries throughout the letter as the overall focus, NOT the corporate, only. That which is corporate ALWAYS proceeds from that which is FIRST individual in this letter.

 

Four kingdoms and only four.
In John's day he said there were seven heads, five have fallen, (Kings, 1st Republic 2nd republic,triumverate, Dictators. ) one is (Emperors,) One is to come, usually said to be the Christian emperors, but they were still the emperors. I think it was the 10 Gothic conquerers of the empire. anyway, the eighth is

• 
  Revelation 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

The papacy/

 

One of a plural group

Speaking to a group again

"Me" is singular. "Is" is singular, "are is plural" although we often use You as singular, we always use the plural verb, "You Are" not "You is"

I am glad you raised that as it shows the danger of using modern translations
Here it is from the KJV:

• 19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

Remember pronouns beginning with T are singular, and those beginning with Y are plural

So let us have a closer look.

• 19 What? know ye (P) not that your (P) body (S) is (S) the temple (S) of the Holy Ghost which is in you (P), which ye (P) have of God, and ye (P) are not your (P) own?

The singular body of all of you (the body of believers, the Church) is the singular Temple of the Holy Ghost and ye, the Church are not your own, it is Christ'us.

 

To use your language, Goofy. Josephus was an eye witness, you are not.

You could read Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

 

To call an eye witness a fairy tale shows exactly how you think.

Only thing creditable is what you believe.

You say it hasn't happened.
Josephus says otherwise. He is lying.
Preterism is a Jesuit teaching= it's wrong /Hersey.
Futurism is a Jesuit teaching= it doesn't matter because you say it hasn't happened yet so it means it's true.

You really have no argument what so ever. At least the rest of them challenge me.

 

1: The beast is ROME the fourth and last bestial kingdom in Daniel 7 before the saints take the kingdom, when the stone made without hands strikes the statue. Remember the stone cut without hands?

• Daniel 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

The Church was founded "in the days of these kings" that is during the time of the statue, and will destroy the statue when Christ come again. One coming.

2: The true doctrine of the papacy being antichrist was taught long before the reformation, and discovered independently by the reformers from the scripture.

Your posts are so biased against preterist, you ignore the many Jesuit writer who founded futurism. Ribera, Bellarmine, Walpole (pen name Christopherson) Alcazar (false name Ben Ezra)

Brought into the protestant churches by Edward Irving, who was excommunicated the the Church of Scotland for heresy in his doctrine of Christ) Irving taught J N Darby who added to and expanded the teaching and forced it onto his Plymouth Brethren, who, after their founding in the 1820's made rapid progress, and eventually took it to the USA probably at the time of the civil war. Later it made more rapid progress after Scofield introduced it in his bible, and it was given free to all the bible colleges.

First it was taught by Presbyterians, then the AOG then eventually, the Baptists, Pentecostals etc.

Larkin is more accurate than you in his Dispensational truth, traces history of the teaching, firstly by the ECF. (Which is false, they taught nothing like it) then if fell into disuse (according to Larkin) then it was taught by the Jesuits in the 16th century, well here it is

Extract from Larkin Dispensational Truth

]The "Futurist School" interprets the language of the Apocalypse "literally," except such symbols as are named as such, and holds that the whole of the Book, from the end of the third chapter, is yet "future" and unfulfilled, and that the greater part of the Book, from the beginning of chapter six to the end of chapter nineteen, describes what shall come to pass during the last week of "Daniel's Seventy Weeks." This view, while it dates in modern times only from the close of the Sixteenth Century, is really the most ancient of the three. It was held in many of its prominent features by the primitive Fathers of the Church, and is one of the early interpretations of scripture truth that sunk into oblivion with the growth of Papacy, and that has been restored to the Church in these last times. In its present form it may be said to have originated at the end of the Sixteenth Century with the Jesuit Ribera, who, actuated by the same motive as the Jesuit Alcazar, sought to rid the Papacy of the stigma of being called the "Antichrist," and so referred the prophecies of the Apocalypse to the distant future. This view was accepted by the Roman Catholic Church and was for a long time confined to it, but, strange to say, it has wonderfully revived since the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, and that among Protestants. It is the most largely accepted of the three views. It has been charged with ignoring the Papal and Mohammedan systems, but this is far from the truth, for it looks upon them as foreshadowed in the scriptures, and sees in them the "Type" of those great "Anti-Types" yet future, the "Beast" and the "False Prophet." The "Futurist" interpretation of scripture is the one employed in this book.

Philip Mauro described the book as Dispensational Error

Of course if the Pope is not Antichrist, the Waldensians got it wrong, the Hussites got it wrong, Wyclif an the Lollards got it wrong, the Bogomils got it wrong, all the reformers, baptists got it wrong. All the martyrs of those times got it wrong. Not very likely.

More likely that this modern teaching is wrong.

 

Of course the prophesied eschatological events simply HAVEN'T YET HAPPENED, THat is not what is in dispute. What is in dispute is you taking events that are history, and refusing to believe it and taken them out of their context and flinging them into the distant future.

 

Futurists have been saying that for years. We were taught that soon after the six day war, still being trotted out ad nauseum.

Of course it doesn't matter anyway, because the temple is now the Church, Christ's body.

• 1 Corinthians 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?