Search results

My apologies - you never did say that. Since the events did happen exactly as Jesus described in the Olivet Discourse, I'd say that "the proof is in the pudding". Not sure what other kind of proof you could find. "If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...".

Since Jerusalem was actually invaded by the Roman army, and these things did come to pass, I suggest the burden of proof is on the Dispensationalists. Can you prove Jesus meant a future audience when so much of what He prophesied came to pass within 40 years of when He spoke? After all, He did...

Jesus was telling His immediate audience that they were the generation who would see those signs, and so they did when the Roman army surrounded Jerusalem and with the events of the Jewish Wars from AD 68-70. If Jesus meant a future generation, He would have said "when they see all these...

I must respectfully disagree, Brother. In Matthew 24:34, Jesus told His disciples that their generation would "not pass away until ALL these things take place". In context, we see that "all these things" refers to everything He has been telling them from verse 1. You agree that the first part...

We agree on that, Brother. What we disagree on is what the literal meaning is.

One good reason - Jesus was following the example of the prophets, who often used symbolic language. Remember, Jesus was referring to Isaiah 13:10, which was a proclamation of judgment against Babylon. In Revelation 14 and 18, spiritual Babylon (Jerusalem) is "fallen, fallen". In Rev. 17, we...

First, I'd like to thank you for the compliment. Though we disagree on this topic, I can see that you know your Scriptures and your history quite well. As you say, Scripture shapes history, not vice versa. Getting back to the passage in Acts 2, Peter explained to his audience that what was...

From the Preterist perspective, those terms have been redefined by the Dispensationalists. As I mentioned to Roby earlier, it's largely a matter of interpretation - especially as to what is "literal" vs symbolic. Good thing our salvation doesn't depend upon our eschatological view :).

Not quite sure what your point is here. Are you suggesting that the Jews are judged differently from Gentiles? In Christ, there is neither Jew nor Gentile, male nor female, slave nor free.

From the Preterist perspective, it's quite obvious that these events have occurred. Jesus quoted from the OT in Matt. 24:29-31. The prophets often used symbolic language to describe events. The disciples were familiar with this "language", and understood it to be symbolic and not literal...

Not that I doubt that you see this, as you are a obviously a true Man of God. However, I don't see Him doing that at all, Brother. I see Jesus saying that the Pharisees that He was talking to were just as guilty as the ones who killed Zechariah and the other OT prophets.

Paul also said that those who are in Christ are the "Israel of God". Judgment came upon the apostate Jews. (No, I don't believe in "Replacement Theology".)

I truly wish I could believe that. Then again, maybe us Preterists will be very pleasantly surprised at what happens when Christ returns.

To be completely honest, I don't see a conflict. From previous posts, I know you are a pretty smart guy. Maybe I'm just not getting it.

Every generation from the 1st Century has been sure they were the generation that will see the Second Advent. Not to be a "Last Days Scoffer", but today is really no different.

This was a "coming" in judgment on Jerusalem, not the Second Advent. Israel wasn't reborn as a nation in one day, though. This was a decades-long process that finally came to pass after WWII, thanks in large part to the Zionist Movement. Having said that, I fully support the modern state of...

The normal everyday use as His original audience would have understood it - "soon" means "soon", "you will see" means "you will see", etc. It doesn't make sense for Him to have meant "nation" in this context. Occam's Razor would apply the simplest meaning unless it was obviously allegorical.

I know that I'm not telling you anything you don't know, but I am just going over the scene here. Jesus was speaking of Adam (the first murder victim) to Zechariah, who is presumably the last martyr in the Hebrew canon. Jesus was exposing how corrupt the Pharisees were in this passage. Jesus...

Hi @robycop3 . I've just discovered this post, otherwise I would have replied earlier. It's always an interesting topic. I suspect you are as passionate about Preterism as I am, and maybe even more so. A new understanding of the Olivet Discourse is largely why I changed to the Partial...

My response to your comments regarding James. Christians throughout the ages have had issues with whether James contradicts the doctrine of "Faith Alone". James is telling us that good works is evidence of our salvation, but he never said that works are required for salvation. You still...