Preterism v. God's Plan for our future

Whether one agrees with a pre-70 A.D. dating, there is evidence to consider in favor of such a dating. Kenneth Gentry, Jr. wrote a very good book on the subject entitled Before Jerusalem Fell.

 

Eusebius was quoting Irenaeus, who, although quoted many reliable things, made many unreliable comments as well. For instance, Irenaeus believe Jesus to be over 50 years of age when He died on the cross! You have to remember that these people are mere men, not the Word of God!

 

Greetings in the name of the Lord.

eschatologist + prophecynut = two peas in a pod?

For many years I accepted age 33 for when he died.
After research I believe he was close to 40.
Forty in God's Word is a time of testing.

 

What? Are you saying the Jews used the term "heaven and earth" as a idiom for the heavans and earth?

Is. 51:16 And I have put my words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people.

The phrase "heaven and earth" was used metaphorically for the Old Covenant, her people and her rituals. Clearly in Is. 51 He is not speaking of the physical creation but of His creation of His Old Covenant people and system.

So tell me how do those who are alive at the end of the Millinnium make it to this new heaven and earth? Where do they go if they are living on the old earth which God destroys?

Really? So if those heavens and earth in Is 65 and 66 don't refer to the same ones in II Peter and Rev 21, then you have God destroying His New Heaven and Earth and replacing it with another New Heaven and Earth. Perhaps you need a chart showing us how this is done.

 

Iraneous was a disciple of John people. I will take Eusebious' quote of Iraneous, the disciple of John, as to when John was on Patmos.

What is so interesting is that the futurist view does not depend on the date of Revelation, however, preterism falls apart on this one fact.

 

Nero certainly did persecute Christians, but not to the degree that Domitian did. I don't think we have evidence that there was empire-wide Christian persecution before 70 AD - in Rome yes but in Asia minor?

G K Beale (NIGTC) gives a very nice lengthy discussion on the date of Revelation, fair and even-handed.

 

Irenaeus never met John.

So do you take Irenaeus' word on this as well:


For how had He disciples, if He did not teach? And how did He teach, if He had not a Master’s age? For He came to Baptism as one Who had not yet fulfilled thirty years, but was beginning to be about thirty years old; (for so Luke, who hath signified His years, bath set it down; Now Jesus, when He came to Baptism, began to be about thirty years old and He preached for one year only after His Baptism: completing His thirtieth year He suffered, while He was still young, and not yet come to riper age. But the age of 30 years is the first of a young man’s mind, and that it reaches even to the fortieth year, everyone will allow: but after the fortieth and fiftieth year, it begins to verge towards elder age: which our Lord was of when He taught, as the Gospel and all the Elders witness, who in Asia conferred with John the Lord’s disciple, to the effect that John had delivered these things unto them: for he abode with them until the times of Trajan. And some of them saw not only John, but others also of the Apostles, and had this same account from them, and witness to the aforesaid relation. Whom ought we rather to believe? These, being such as they are, or Ptolemy, who never beheld the Apostles, nor ever in his dreams attained to any vestige of an Apostle? (Against Heresies, 2:22:5)

Here is what the late-date evidence boiles down to:

:"We, therefore, do not venture to affirm anything with certainty respecting the name of antichrist. For were it necessary that his name should be clearly announced to the present age, it would have been declared by him who saw the revelation. For it has not been long since it was seen, but almost in our own generation, about the end of Domitian's reign."

The context of this is not even about when Revelation was written. It is in reference to who the antichrist was. This statement seems to indicate that the antichrist was a past figure and his name was not important or John would have told them.


Revelation is in the very same book by Irenaeus, Against Heresies, two paragraphs earlier. In 5:30:1, Irenaeus makes reference to "all the most approved and ancient copies" of the book of Revelation:

Such, then, being the state of the case, and this number [of the Beast] being found in all the most approved and ancient copies [of the book of Revelation], and those men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony to it....

Does it make sense that Irenaeus would refer to "all the most approved and ancient copies" of the book of Revelation, and then state that John saw the Revelation "no very long time since, but almost in our day?"

Clement of Alexandria (head teacher at the Catechetical School at Alexandria) was a contemporary of Irenaeus. He wrote his Miscellanies (or Stromata) in c. A.D. 190-195. In 7:17 he condemns certain teachers who were writing counterfeit scriptures. Clement explained that those teachers and their scriptures were counterfeit because they had appeared after the close of the teaching of the Apostles. According to Clement, the close of the teaching of the Apostles (which includes the writing of the Scriptures) "ends with Nero." Nero died in A.D. 68. Clement of Alexandria thus implied that the "New Testament," including the book of Revelation, was written before A.D. 68.

 

Charles,

There would have been many more than seven churches in Asia Minor by 96 A.D. The fact that there were only seven smacks of a much early dating, probably around 65 A.D. or earlier.

Read the seven letters to those churches. The Christians at that time Revelation was written were being greatly persecuted by THE JEWS, and that is reflected in the seven letters. This Jewish persecution of the saints is the same problem that the Apostles write about throughout the New Testament period - read especially I Thes.2:14-16. There doesn't seem to be this same kind of persecution at the time of Domition - a persecution, yes, but not from the Jews like the New Testament period incurred.

Chapters 17-18 of Revelation describe the destruction of the great city", wherein is "the blood of prophets" (18:24). This could only refer to the destruction of first century JERUSALEM, as no other city was guilty of the blood of the prophets. Jesus said the same thing of Jerusalem in Matt.23 and Lk.13:33, and in the vineyard and marriage parables. A pre-70 dating makes the imminency statements come alive, since Jerusalem would have been destroyed "shortly" (1:1; 22:6) thereafter. On the other hand, a 96 A.D. date makes the imminency statements lose their meaning. Yes, Jerusalem was destroyed again in 136 A.D., but 70 A.D. was the biggie...the intended time for sure, since that is when the Temple was destroyed. Allusions to the TEmple abound in Chapters 17-18, meaning that it was STILL STANDING at the time Revelation was written. Revelation points AHEAD to the destruction of the Temple, as seen in chapters 17-18. Jesus, again, paralleled Revelation 17-18 with his declaration about the Temple's destruction. And he never taught a "rebuilt temple"! A pre-70 dating makes great sense of the whole book of Revelation.

Warren

 

All I have read says there was no wide spread persecution under Domitian.

 

No thanks, I'll stick with scripture. However you and LaHaye continue on in selling your imaginations to the Church. Although I'm sure LaHaye has profited more from his than you have.

 

I ment Ignatious. Ireneous did have access to the historical record.

Preterism is just so comical.

Jesus said that this time period (the Olivet Discourse with the parallel in Revelation) would be the worst the world has ever known or will ever know.

So, the destruction of buildings in Jerusalem and 1,000,000 deaths somehow in the mind of preterists is even worse than the flood, which destroyed the entire world and all but 8 people.

How utterly pathetic. Jesus even mentioned Noah in the O.D. Sorry, this thread is not for students of Scripture. Preterists are their own little cult and happy to be part of it.

 

Daniel David,

"Since the beginning of the world to this time, nor ever shall be" (Matt.24:21) - Jesus is quoting Daniel 12:1. Yet, he states it a little bit differently. This is not uncommon. I believe we need to reference the way Daniel stated it and consider that the "nation" he was alluding to was the nation of Israel, since his prophecies concern his people, the Jews (Dan.9:24). Daniel says, "..since there was a nation (OF ISRAEL) even to that same time". Now consider that Jesus himself was speaking of events that would transpire in "Judaea" and we solve the problem. What happened to the Jews and Judaea in 70 A.D. was the worst tribulation in THAT NATION'S history.

Now, go back to page 2 of this thread and read my case for a pre-70 dating of Revelation. The Olivet Discourse was a parallel to Revelation, meaning they both pointed to the same events and timeframe. What did the Olivet Discourse point to? A no brainer indeed - Jerusalem's first century desolation, when the Temple was destroyed, bring to an "end" the Old Covenant age or ministration of death. It fits so well. My, my, my!

Warren

 

Is this where we let our imagination run wild?

So why call " heaven and earth" an idiom if it means heaven and earth. That is like saying the Jews referred to Jerusalem with the idiom "Jerusalem".

Yes you do. You said this:

"Each place that "new Heavens and new Earth" appearsit referes to a physical reality, not a spiritualreality."

You also said you didn't know if the New H and E in Is 65 and 66 refer to the same one in Rev 21. If they do not then how do you get a new heaven and earth without destroying another new heaven and earth? Imagination?

You say it must be physical. Which is it Ed? Are you attempting humor again?

What ever happened to your study of Is 65 and 66? Are those the same New Heavens and Earth as Rev 21? DD refused to answer this question a few months ago as well. Perhaps he has an answer now.

And when are the last days? According to Ed AD33 through 2004 and counting. Therefore there have always been these scoffers.

So the 1000 year Kingdom age might just be 1 day. And Genesis might be speaking of a 7000 year creation. etc....

Heb 10:37 says For yet a little while and He who is coming will come and will not tarry .

Again you show your ignorance of preterism. The fathers are speaking of OT saints.

I have done this using scripture. Either your memory is failing or you just choose to ignore it.

What is a Jew Ed? Race or religion? What kind of Jew will fulfill your eschatological view? Tom Arnold is a Jewish convert, does he? How about all those living in Israel who are the descendants of Jewish converts from the 900sAD?