Preterism v. God's Plan for our future

Why did the Disciples flee Jerusalem prior
to 66 AD? Shouldn't they have waited
until the Temple was abominated by desolation
in 70AD?

Why did the Disciples flee Jerusalem prior
to 66 AD? Shouldn't they have waited
until the Temple was abominated by desolation
in 70AD?

Click to expand...

Luke answers this for us:

Luke 21:20And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies , then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. 22For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Had they run into the city, which would be the normal thing to do, they would have been trapped inside the City. Jerusalem was a fortress, any sign of danger citizens would have gone their for protection. However those who heard the words of Jesus and obeyed were spared. It took the Romans 3 1/2 years to finally destroy the city.

Here is what John Gill says:
uke 21:20
And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies…

The Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Persic versions read, "with an army"; that is, with the Roman army, as it was by the army which Titus Vespasian brought against it, and besieged it with:
then know that the desolation thereof is nigh;
signifying, that there would be no deliverance to be expected, as when the Assyrian army under Rabshakeh appeared against it; but that whenever the Roman army besieged it, its destruction might be looked upon as inevitable; nor was the siege raised until it was destroyed, which was about four years after.

Luke 21:21
And let them which are in the midst of it;

either of Judea, as the preceding clause seems to direct the sense; or in Jerusalem, and which indeed was in the midst of Judea; and this sense is favoured by the Persic version, which renders it, "within the city"; let them go out of it, as the Christians did to Pella, Mount Libanus, and other places:

and let not them that are in the countries;

either foreign countries, or in towns and villages;

enter thereinto:

either into Judea, or into Jerusalem; contrary to this advice, they came from all countries to the feast of the passover at Jerusalem, and were there shut up by the siege and destroyed F3.

http://www.searchgodsword.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=lu&chapter=021&verse=021


Matthew Henry says this about Matt 24:15

v. 15, etc. Here he comes more closely to answer their questions concerning the desolation of the temple; and what he said here, would be of use to his disciples, both for their conduct and for their comfort, in reference to that great event; he describes the several steps of that calamity, such as are usual in war. 1. The Romans setting up the abomination of desolation in the holy place, v. 15. Now, (1.) Some understand by this an image, or statue, set up in the temple by some of the Roman governors, which was very offensive to the Jews, provoked them to rebel, and so brought the desolation upon them. The image of Jupiter Olympius, which Antiochus caused to be set upon the altar of God, is called Bdelygma eremoseos — The abomination of desolation, the very word here used by the historian, 1 Mac. 1:54. Since the captivity in Babylon, nothing was, nor could be, more distasteful to the Jews than an image in the holy place, as appeared by the mighty opposition they made when Caligula offered to set up his statue there, which had been of fatal consequence, if it had not been prevented, and the matter accommodated, by the conduct of Petronius; but Herod did set up an eagle over the temple-gate; and, some say, the statue of Titus was set up in the temple. (2.) Others choose to expound it by the parallel place (Lu. 21:20), when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies. Jerusalem was the holy city, Canaan the holy land, the Mount Moriah, which lay about Jerusalem, for its nearness to the temple was, they thought in a particular manner holy ground; on the country lying round about Jerusalem the Roman army was encamped, that was the abomination that made desolate. The land of an enemy is said to be the land which thou abhorrest (Isa. 7:16); so an enemy’s army to a weak but wilful people may well be called the abomination. Now this is said to be spoken of by Daniel, the prophet, who spoke more plainly of the Messiah and his kingdom than any of the Old-Testament prophets did. He speaks of an abomination making desolate, which should be set up by Antiochus (Dan. 11:31; 12:11); but this that our Saviour refers to, we have in the message that the angel brought him (Dan. 9:27), of what should come at the end of seventy weeks, long after the former; for the overspreading of abominations, or, as the margin reads it, with the abominable armies (which comes home to the prophecy here), he shall make it desolate. Armies of idolaters may well be called abominable armies; and some think, the tumults, insurrections, and abominable factions and seditions, in the city and temple, may at least be taken in as part of the abomination making desolate. Christ refers them to that prophecy of Daniel, that they might see how the ruin of their city and temple was spoken of in the Old Testament, which would both confirm his prediction, and take off the odium of it. They might likewise from thence gather the time of it—soon after the cutting off of Messiah the prince; the sin that procured it—their rejecting him, and the certainty of it— it is a desolation determined. As Christ by his precepts confirmed the law, so by his predictions he confirmed the prophecies of the Old Testament, and it will be of good use to compare both together.

http://www.searchgodsword.org/com/mhc-com/view.cgi?book=mt&chapter=024

Luke 21:20-21a (KJV1769):
And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies,
then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains ...

There are two understandings of this:

1. When you see Jerusalem compassed with
armies ... then leave

2. When the desolation takes place ...
then leave

If you had been in Jerusalem would you have left
when the extra armies started appearing?
Or would you have left the day the stones begin to fall and the
wood in the Temple began to burn?

In fact, the disciples had dispersed from Jerusalem
VERY EARLY. Paul left Jerusalem to chase down the
scattered church about 36AD.

Neither of the two understandings of Luke 21:20-21a
was done in 66-70AD. These remain to be fulfilled.
Preterist is wrong, futurism is right.

Does God even have a plan for our
physcial future in the Preterist viewpoint?
Nuclear war?
Hell on earth?
Millinnial Kingdom?
Heaven on earth?

Luke 21:20-21a (KJV1769):
And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies,
then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains ...

There are two understandings of this:

1. When you see Jerusalem compassed with
armies ... then leave

Click to expand...

Yes. That is correct.

2. When the desolation takes place ...
then leave

Click to expand...

That is incorrect. Too late.

If you had been in Jerusalem would you have left
when the extra armies started appearing?
Or would you have left the day the stones begin to fall and the
wood in the Temple began to burn?

Click to expand...

I would have left when Jesus said to leave. When the armies surrounded Jerusalem. It was impossible to leave after the Romans started their assult. It was 3 1/2 years later that the stones fell and the Temple burned. You need to read Josephus' account. It will help you out.

In fact, the disciples had dispersed from Jerusalem
VERY EARLY. Paul left Jerusalem to chase down the
scattered church about 36AD.

Click to expand...

Yes, the disciples were to proclaim the gospel throughout the world. However the Christian Jews still lived and worshipped in Jerusalem.

Neither of the two understandings of Luke 21:20-21a
was done in 66-70AD. These remain to be fulfilled.
Preterist is wrong, futurism is right.

Click to expand...

Ed you keep switching positions. You said this just a day or 2 ago:

ED

Mark 13:14 (KJV1769):

But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation,
spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where
it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,)
then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

In 67-70AD the wise Christians left for the mountains
BEFORE the armies arrived. After the armies arrived
was TOO late to flee to the hills.

Click to expand...

Which is it? It is hard to discuss with you if you keep switching sides.

Does God even have a plan for our
physcial future in the Preterist viewpoint?
Nuclear war?
Hell on earth?
Millinnial Kingdom?
Heaven on earth?

Click to expand...

Does God even have a plan for our physcial future in the Preterist viewpoint?
Yes, It's called death.

Nuclear war? Who knows? Will you be disappointed if not?

Hell on earth? Who knows? Will you be disappointed if not?

Millinnial Kingdom?No

Heaven on earth? No. I believe this is your view.

Eph 3:14For this reason I kneel before the Father, 15from whom his whole family in heaven and on earth derives its name. 16I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being, 17so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. And I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, 18may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, 19and to know this love that surpasses knowledge--that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.
20Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, 21to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen.

Ed quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither of the two understandings of Luke 21:20-21a
was done in 66-70AD. These remain to be fulfilled.
Preterist is wrong, futurism is right.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ed you keep switching positions. You said this just a day or 2 ago:

ED quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark 13:14 (KJV1769):

But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation,
spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where
it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,)
then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

In 67-70AD the wise Christians left for the mountains
BEFORE the armies arrived. After the armies arrived
was TOO late to flee to the hills.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Which is it? It is hard to discuss with you if you keep switching sides.

Click to expand...

Both of my sayings mean the same thing.
You painted yourself in a corner.

Ed Edwards: "Does God even have a plan for our physcial
future in the Preterist viewpoint?"

Grasshopper: "Yes, It's called death."

I rest my case for
Furturist, Dispensational, Pre-millinnial Second Advent,
Pre-Tribulation Rapture/resurrection

Perhaps soon, Jesus will rise from the heaven to the
earth, the waiting Saints will drop into His arms
and fall away from this earth like a fig tree ripe
drops it figs in a wind to the waiting ground.

1 Corinthians 15:43-44 (HCSB):

43 sown in dishonor, raised in glory;
sown in weakness, raised in power;
44 sown a natural body, raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

Even if I die i get RAISED in GLORY (resurrection)
If I don't die i FALL AWAY in GLORY (rapture)
I'm alive right now so
this will happend to me in the future.

21to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen.

Click to expand...

That is not saying this present world would exist with a Church of mortals who were sinners getting saved and dying, forever. It is "to Him (God) be glory...forever", and this glory will cme from those of us in "the Church" (all generations from then to now), as well as of course, Christ Jesus, as we live with Him forever.
I have even seen some full preterists admit that God could always end this physical world at some later time; it just isn't revealed in the prophecies. And it is in a state of decay anyway, and can't last forever, unless God does something to renew it.

:"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.

Click to expand...

He was not saying the antichrist was a past figure, but the seeing/giving of the revelation of it was of course past, and the name could have been revealed to "this present age", meaning it was future and unrevealed, but this was not deemed necessary by John. If Nero was the final antitype
(that John was referring to), then that would not be mysterious to the future generations of the Church at all. But once again, this period of the Church did not recognize Revelation (or at least all of it) as being fulfilled. That first came a bit later, when the Church gained power, and then concluded that this new rule of theirs was the the Kingdom)

To answer an earlier statement of Warren:

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.

Click to expand...

That does noes not say that those were the only churches in existence in that whole land at the time. The 7 congregations lied along a mail route, and were thus selected for these messages, which I believe cover the whole range of strengths and weaknesses in the entire body of Christ for all ages; hence the 7 lampstands, 7 stars, 7 spirits of God, which are spoken of as if they are the whole of the Church. Others hold these as eras down to the present, but these traints can be found simultaneously in any age in the church. This is one strong reason why the prophecies and promises are still for us today.

Here's a question for full preterism:
In the discussions earlier this year, I did not get a clear answer regarding the 1000 years. Partial prets say that is the current time, but the full prets who spoke here confessed not really knowing. But since then, reading various full pret sites; I see that the Millennium was supposed to be the 40 year period from AD30-AD70. Of course, some symbolic explanation was given, that in its own right could have been possible. But still, the big problem with this is still, this "Millennium" would end with the parousia, which was supposed to be the fulfillment of all, and hence the beginning of these promises. After all, this Millennial reign with Christ was still prophecied as future by John. And it is after the resurrection of those who had overcome the mark of the beast and other tribulations associated with "the end", while the resurrection was still spoken of as future as well. This is one area where the partial prets really have a good point against full preterism.

Both of my sayings mean the same thing.
You painted yourself in a corner.

Click to expand...

What? You have taken 2 positions. How have I painted myself into a corner?

Is Luke 21:21-22 past or future? You have said both. I have said past.

I have even seen some full preterists admit that God could always end this physical world at some later time; it just isn't revealed in the prophecies.

Click to expand...

Possible but in seems to contradict other passages such as:

Ecc 1:4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever .

If Nero was the final antitype
(that John was referring to), then that would not be mysterious to the future generations of the Church at all.

Click to expand...

Why must Nero be a type or anti-type of anyone or anything? Again, you seem to be the filter that determines what the types and anti-types are, and what the do or do not fulfill.

As far as Nero not whom John was speaking of, many in the early church did in fact see it as so:

F.W.Farrar
"all the earliest Christian writers on the Apocalypse, from Irenaeus down to Victorious of Pettau and Commodian in the fourth, and Andreas in the fifth, and St. Beatus in the eighth century, connect Nero, or some Roman emperor, with the Apocalyptic Beast ." (The Early Days of Christianity p.541)

"the clue is preserved for us, not only by Jewish Talmudists, and Pagan historians and authors, such as Tacitus, Suetonius, Dion Cassius, and Dion Chrysostom; but also by Christian fathers like St. Irenaeus, Lactantius, St. Victorinus, Sulpicius Severus, and the Sibylline books, and even by St. Jerome, and by St. Augustine. Nothing can prove more decisively than these references that for four centuries many Christians identified Nero with the Beast."

"Beyond all shadow of doubt or uncertainty, the Wild Beast from the sea is meant as a symbol of the emperor Nero. Here, at any rate, St. John has neglected no single means by which he could make his meaning clear without deadly peril to himself and the Christian Church. He describes this Wild Beast by no less than sixteen distinctive marks, and then all but tells us in so many words the name of the person whom it is intended to symbolize." (The Early Days of Christianity, 5.28.5)

Clement of Alexandria (2nd Century) "We have still to add to our chronology the following, -- I mean the days which Daniel indicates from the desolation of Jerusalem, the seven years and seven months of the reign of Vespasian. For the two years are added to the seventeen months and eighteen days of Otho, and Galba, and Vitellius; and the result is three years and six months, which is "the half of the week," as Daniel the prophet said. For he said that there were two thousand three hundred days from the time that the abomination of Nero stood in the holy city, till its destruction. For thus the declaration, which is subjoined, shows: "How long shall be the vision, the sacrifice taken away, the abomination of desolation, which is given, and the power and the holy place shall be trodden under foot? And he said to him, Till the evening and morning, two thousand three hundred days, and the holy place shall be taken away."

"These two thousand three hundred days, then, make six years four months, during the half of which Nero held sway, and it was half a week; and for a half, Vespasian with Otho, Galba, and Vitellius reigned. And on this account Daniel says, "Blessed is he that cometh to the thousand three hundred and thirty-five days." For up to these days was war, and after them it ceased. And this number is demonstrated from a subsequent chapter, which is as follows: "And from the time of the change of continuation, and of the giving of the abomination of desolation, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and thirty-five days." " (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, p. 334)

Augustine (4th Century)
"What means the declaration, that the mystery of iniquity already works?... Some suppose this to be spoken of the Roman emperor, and therefore Paul did not speak in plain words, because he would not incur the charge of calumny for having spoken evil of the Roman emperor: although he always expected that what he had said would be understood as applying to Nero."

http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/n/nero_emperor-beast.html

I see that the Millennium was supposed to be the 40 year period from AD30-AD70.

Click to expand...

This is a difficult topic no matter which view you hold to. However this view of the Millinnium seems to fit the best for me.

But still, the big problem with this is still, this "Millennium" would end with the parousia, which was supposed to be the fulfillment of all, and hence the beginning of these promises. After all, this Millennial reign with Christ was still prophecied as future by John. And it is after the resurrection of those who had overcome the mark of the beast and other tribulations associated with "the end", while the resurrection was still spoken of as future as well. This is one area where the partial prets really have a good point against full preterism.

Click to expand...

Good thoughts. Lets look at Rev 20:2-6


Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

I believe this was occuring at the time of the writing of Revelation. Clearly there was some kind of Kingdom during the writing of the Gospel:

Col 1:13For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves,


and bound him a thousand years,

Luke 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.


Matt 12:25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?
27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges.
28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.
29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.


And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them.......... and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.


Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.

but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

I Peter 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood , to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Rev 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. 25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is , when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live .

It seems that the things that will happen during this reign were already going on.

Grasshopper: "What? You have taken 2 positions. How have
I painted myself into a corner?

Is Luke 21:21-22 past or future? You have said both. I have said past."

I have taken one and only one position. You painted
yourself into a corner when you thought i took two
positions. I was saying that the prophecy of
Luke 21:21-22 is in the future, it did NOT happen in 66-70AD.
Then the disciples in Judea LEFT before the armies
came up around Jerusalem, before the AOD was committed.
BTW, the AOD was comitted by Antichous (sp?) in the BC,
in 70AD, and will be committed again in OUR FUTURE by the
Antichrist to come.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have even seen some full preterists admit that God could always end this physical world at some later time; it just isn't revealed in the prophecies.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Possible but in seems to contradict other passages such as:

Ecc 1:4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.

Click to expand...

This doesn't necessarily preclude the restoration or replacement of the earth we often describe as the "end". It would be the "end" of this current state of the world (decay, which can't go on forever, once again). Another thing to keep in mind is the conditional nature of statements like "forever" and especially "forever in their generations". We see plenty of this in the Law saying that various old covenant practices would be established forever. (Lawkeeping groups use these to condemn orthodox Christianity for not keeping Sabbaths and other laws). But we know these were fulfilled by Christ, and do not carry on literally, because the conditions of their promise (physical Israel keeping the covenant) were not met.

Why must Nero be a type or anti-type of anyone or anything? Again, you seem to be the filter that determines what the types and anti-types are, and what the do or do not fulfill.

Click to expand...

Two things. For one, the thing that makes them look like types is that all the details are very cloudy, such as the deadly wound. Josephus didn't really cover it, and Preterism is not even completely decided as to what it was. Some have speculated that it was Otho as a supposed "revived Nero" or a "False Nero" after him. These are very loose fulfillments, and thus shadows of a greater one. Second, "the beast" is not just a single leader, but rather the whole system he represents: the chain of pagan kingdoms in general (hence the lion, bear and leopard reference; the 7 heads are the heads of those and the 4th beast put together), and the Roman Empire (the 4th beast that engulfed the others) in particular. In my theory, the "deadly wound" represents the fall of Rome— the 7th head, in 476 AD. It was healed by Justinian (the 4th horn) in 554— the "imperial restoration". All the world marveled at the restored Roman Empire.
So yes, Nero definitely represented "the beast" back then, and it would definitely point the readers to which system was being implicated. As the system went on (not really "smashed by Christ" yet, though I know your "symbolic" claim ), Nero is then a type of the final leader.

As far as Nero not whom John was speaking of, many in the early church did in fact see it as so:

F.W.Farrar
"all the earliest Christian writers on the Apocalypse, from Irenaeus...

Click to expand...

My statement was based on the quote from Irenaeus about antichrist not being revealed. Perhaps I read it wrong, but still, while the writers may recognized Nero as the Beast, they still didn't recognize themselves as being in the final kingdom at that point.

I believe this was occuring at the time of the writing of Revelation. Clearly there was some kind of Kingdom during the writing of the Gospel:

Col 1:13For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves,

Luke 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.

Matt 12 except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.

And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them.......... and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.

but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

I Peter 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood , to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Rev 1:5 6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

It seems that the things that will happen during this reign were already going on.

Click to expand...

I figured you would use those. Explains your "they had it and they didn't" regarding them having spiritual life and some of the promises then, before the parousia.
But still, this reign follows the first resurrection, or "IS" the first resurrection, according to v.5. Yet, based on 1 Cor, and others, the resurrection was future, at this supposed Parousia. Plus, "the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands". If this Millennial reign began at the ascension, or Pentecost, or whatever in AD30, all of that stuff was not happening yet. It clearly refers to the "tribulation" period the last few years before the 2nd Coming. Plus Satan was still being battled with throughout the NT. He was legally defeated at the Cross, but there were still "wicked spirits in high places". I guess you could try to claim that that was the "little while" at the end he was released; but he is still mentioned throughout Acts, which was still the beginning.
The partial prets have a stronger theory that NOW is the Millennium (1000 means "indefinitely large"; it wouldn't make sense to represent another number— 40). Still, I take issue that that would lend itself to the popular Right wing Christian claim that the Christian era in the West was a golden age of righteounsness, and only now that so many are abandoning "Christian culture" and its outward morality, is "Satan being released to yet again deceive the nations". He was very much active all throughout Church history. Marking the destruction of the Temple as the final casting out of Satan would imply that Judaism was the only deception he was responsible for, (while all the sins/deceptions of the Gentiles which continue to the present somehow comes only from their own "flesh".)
(One thing I always wondered is when "they compassed the camp of the saints about, and the
beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them").

Ed,

Hermeneutics 101 says that our views must be based on explicit statements from the scripture, not extrapolated ideas. Can you please show me where it explicitly states that the Temple will be destroyed and then rebuilt 9especially the rebuilt part)? You keep saying things like "antichrist will sit in a rebuilt temple", yet nowhere in the New Testament do I find it stated that the Temple will be rebuilt. Your claim is literally based on a circular idea and preconcieved notion made to support gap theology, or dispensationalism.

So show the list how you abide by the most basic rule of interpretation - explicit statements from scripture. Show us where the notion of a rebuilt temple in explicitly stated in the New Testament. No extrapolations please!

Warren

Warren: "Can you please show me where it explicitly states
that the Temple will be destroyed and then rebuilt "

I know of no place in the Bible where this is explicitly
stated. However, my history book shows that the Temple
was destroyed in 70AD. The Bible does NOT show that the
Temple was destroyed in 70AD by General Titus (later Emperor
Titus).

Revelation 11:1-2 shows the building of the Temple
(God's sanctuary) during the Tribulation (Daniel's 70th Week):

Then I was given a measuring reed like a rod, with these words:
"Go and measure God's sanctuary and the altar, and count those
who worship there.
2. But exclude the courtyard outside the sanctuary.
Don't measure it, because it is given to the nations,
and they will trample the holy city for 42 months.

It is simple extrapulation to conclude that if a temple is
built on Mt. Zion and there is not one there - the temple
must be rebuilt. The scripture even says not to measure
the outer court where the Dome of the Rock now resides.
No, the Bible does NOT tell explicitly that the Dome of the
Rock will be built on Mt. Zion -- i saw the
Dome of the Rock there in a picture.

Warren: "Hermeneutics 101 says that our views must be based
on explicit statements from the scripture, not extrapolated ideas."

Your statement is not explicitly in the Bible and
you know it. So i will NOT be buying your interpertation
of Hermeneutics.

But then futuristic pre-millinnial pretribulation doctrine
is full of HOPE. Jesus is physically coming back, and this
could happen any time now. I might even get out of having
to retire

Ed,

The destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. was foretold of by Jesus, since that destruction was to happen before "this generation" had passed. And so it was.

Revelation was written sometime shortly before 70 A.D., meaning that the Temple standing in chapters 11,17-18 was Herod's Temple. The Olivet Discourse is a parallel to Revelation, and even dispies admit that. What is the centerpiece of the Olivet Discourse? The Temple's destruction. Revelation foretell the same thing, and attaches THREE imminency statements to it's the fulfillment:

1:1; 22:6 - "shortly come to pass" (no delay of thousands of years, Ed)

1:3; 22:10 - "The time is near" (not far, Ed)

22:7,12,20 - "I come quickly" (not slowly, Ed)


Explicit statements, Ed, not extrapolated ideas. Anyone can extrapolate anyTHING from scripture - all he needs is a preconcieved idea that he cherishes going in. Hello???

Warren

Warren: "Explicit statements, Ed, not extrapolated ideas. Anyone can extrapolate anyTHING from scripture - all he needs is a preconcieved idea that he cherishes going in. Hello???"

Thank you Sir, you have described preterism
to a "T". I am sorely indebeted unto you.
At least i know that i'm extrapolating in
faith; compare to preterist extrapolation
in the dark.

2 Peter 3:15 (HCSB):

Also, regard the patience of our Lord
as [an opportunity for salvation], just as our dear brother Paul,
according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you.

This is the verse that was studied at my Tewsday Bible Study.
I still think that God's "near" and your "near" might mean
two different things. According to 2 Peter 3:8 we
are going on toward the end of the SECOND DAY since Jesus left.
We still have hope that Jesus will return, just as he left.
When He comes He will fulfill most of the prophecies of the
Bible, not just a few as in Preterism.

-ed,
still looking for a physical Millinnial Kingdom of Jesus

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
still looking for a physical Millinnial Kingdom of Jesus

Click to expand...

Then you are looking for something that, as you define it, no one is ever going to see.

Ro 14:19 (nKJV):
Therefore let us pursue the things which make
for peace and the things by which one may edify
another.

What you lack in edification you sure make up
in misplaced enthusiasm

Geez, I thought my first post was on a weighty topic. I guess my 2nd ought to be as well...no sense dilly dallying.....

A good opportunity to bump the thread anyway.....

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.

Click to expand...

AD 66-70 was the greatest Day-of-the-Lord event in Israel's history, and was, unquestionably, the one Christ's followers spoke of mere decades before it transpired. This was the same Day of the Lord concerning which the apostles stated they would remain alive unto its passing (1 Thess 5:2-4,23; Phil 1:6,10; Heb 10:25,36-39; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 1 Cor 5:5). Due to the covenantal significance of the event, that Day of the Lord's vengeance (cf. Luke 21:20-22; Isa 61:2; Jer 46:10) can never be repeated. There is no equal to the level of devastation millions of Messiah-rejecting Jews endured as they were violently excommunicated out of covenant with God (Matt 21:40-45; Acts 3:22-24).