America in Bible Prophecy

[RAdam]

If you had actually read my post you would have seen that what I said was Matthew 24 is about two things: the destruction of Jerusalem and the second coming of Christ (a future event to us today). Jesus used the destruction of Jerusalem as a type of His eventual second coming, which has yet to take place. 1st century Jews saw history as cyclicle. The 1st century Jewish Christian would have read Matthew 24 and looked at the events of 70 AD and seen that the event of their time pictured the eventual personal return of Christ.

Now, you say all things written in the OT prophecy were fullfilled in 70 AD. What about Isaiah 65:17-25? Those texts refer to a new heaven and new earth which the Lord will create. It says He will create Jerusalem rejoicing and there will be no more weeping or crying. The wolf and the lamb shall feed together. Has that ultimately been fullfilled? How about Psalm 102:25-26? "Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands. They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed." Hebrews says this is talking about the world to come. Has that been ultimately fullfilled yet?

Now you point to a text in Luke 21. Look at Luke 24:44 where the risen Lord tells the eleven that He had previously told them that all things written concerning Him in the law, the prophets, and the psalms must be fullfilled. Then He tells them to go forth and preach the gospel abroad, which is a fullfillment of prophecy, Isaiah 49 for example. Then He tells them to tarry in Jerusalem until they be endued with power from on high, meaning the Holy Spirit. This was done on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 and Peter quotes a prophecy from Joel 2 as being fullfilled that day. The point I am making is this: Jesus told them that "all things" written concerning Him are fullfilled, but then gives them instructions which will fullfill other things written concerning Him, the gospel, and the church. Obviously, by all things He didn't mean every single prophecy and text in the OT had been fullfilled, but rather that all concerning His sufferings.

 

[Eric B]

That was my point. Changing history would be needed to presume the point in the post that says the RCC did not have its origins in the Christian church - as in the quote above..."The RCC was a false religion. In order to be an apostacy you must first have believed the true Gospel. You can't fall away from something you never believed. "

in Christ,

Bob

Well, I didn't argue that point.
Still, the point here is, while you can look at it as the church being true under the apostles, and then the whole outward organization of it "falling away" when it grew into the RCC, still, there was enough of a fallign away in the first century before and during the war to fulfill the prophecy.

Never does he say "Ephesus has fallen" in fact Timothy is the pastor at Ephesus. Never does Paul say to Titus "the church has fallen away".
The dark ages of apstacy were still ahead of the christian church - history bears this out.
It did not happen in the first century.
Acts 20 predicts that men will arise teaching false doctrine.
That principle over time - gave us the dark ages. Long after the first century A.D.
Even the Church of Galatia "had not fallen" - though it had division within.

Well... certainly not me.

But then we didn't say this either.

Josephus' account barely scratches the surface of the extent of the many centuries long apostacy that followed the NT authors.

But that which occurred then in their lifetimes was the point of the prophecy.

And never does he get to the 2Thess 2 events surrounding the miracle working power of satan that is still YET to appear. Nor does he even remotely touch the global "every eye shall see him" and "all tribes of the earth shall mourn" and "as lightning from east to west" and "sun darkened" events of Matt 24.

Whoever led the final rebellion (as the "antichrist"/"man of sin" figure), IIRC probably did work miracles. That's what helped lead to your "falling away". Simon Magus the sorcerer in Acts was just the beginning of an alarming trend in the land, of people being bewitched by false leaders working miracles. Obviously, the leader of the final rebellion had such power over the people.
And "the earth" means the land of Israel.
I think there was a report of the sun being darkened then, or something that would have fulfilled that.
and don't forget the rest of what you quoted: every eye shall see Him "even those who pierced Him". (Someone did cite a report by Josephus of some sort of visible appearance of Christ then, along with another theory of a literal rapture. That would go well to explain why the ["left behind"] church then spiraled out of control so rapidly!)

Of course, before, I was arguing dual/typical/cyclical fulfillment, as RAdam is now, and it could still be true. It's just that a greater focus on the events of that time, is the only thing that can explain the time statements.

 

[Grasshopper]

If you had actually read my post you would have seen that what I said was Matthew 24 is about two things: the destruction of Jerusalem and the second coming of Christ (a future event to us today). Jesus used the destruction of Jerusalem as a type of His eventual second coming, which has yet to take place.

So Jesus didn't directly teach His second coming? He only taught it through a type? A type you assume has a future fullfillment. Not to mention Jesus never said the events of AD70 were a type or shadow. To claim the Jews believed this is wishful thinking.

1st century Jews saw history as cyclicle. The 1st century Jewish Christian would have read Matthew 24 and looked at the events of 70 AD and seen that the event of their time pictured the eventual personal return of Christ.

Proof? Or am I just to assume your assumption of what the Jews believed is correct?

Now, you say all things written in the OT prophecy were fullfilled in 70 AD. What about Isaiah 65:17-25? Those texts refer to a new heaven and new earth which the Lord will create. It says He will create Jerusalem rejoicing and there will be no more weeping or crying. The wolf and the lamb shall feed together. Has that ultimately been fullfilled? How about Psalm 102:25-26? "Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands. They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed." Hebrews says this is talking about the world to come. Has that been ultimately fullfilled yet?

Yes they have. Go back and read the questions I asked BobRyan concerning this topic. In the mean time read John Owen's words:

'It is evident, then, that in the prophetical idiom and manner of speech, by heavens and earth, the civil and religious state and combination of men in the world, and the men of them, were often understood. So were the heavens and earth that world which then was destroyed by the flood.

' 4. On this foundation I affirm that the heavens and earth here intended in this prophecy of Peter, the coming of the Lord, the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men, mentioned in the destruction of that heaven and earth, do all of them relate, not to the last and final judgment of the world, but to that utter desolation and destruction that was to be made of the Judaical church and state

'First, There is the foundation of the apostle's inference and exhortation, seeing that all these things, however precious they seem, or what value soever any put upon them, shall be dissolved, that is, destroyed; and that in that dreadful and fearful manner before mentioned, in a day of judgment, wrath, and vengeance, by fire and sword; let others mock at the threats of Christ's coming: He will come- He will not tarry; and then the heavens and earth that God Himself planted, -the sun, moon, and stars of the Judaical polity and church, -the whole old world of worship and worshippers, that stand out in their obstinancy against the Lord Christ, shall be sensibly dissolved and destroyed: this we know shall be the end of these things, and that shortly."

For one you claims to understand the 1st century Hebrew mind, your lack of knowledge of Hebrew idioms is suprising. If you would like to continue discussing the New H&E please do so, I have some questions I would like for you to answer on that.

Now you point to a text in Luke 21. Look at Luke 24:44 where the risen Lord tells the eleven that He had previously told them that all things written concerning Him in the law, the prophets, and the psalms must be fullfilled. Then He tells them to go forth and preach the gospel abroad, which is a fullfillment of prophecy, Isaiah 49 for example. Then He tells them to tarry in Jerusalem until they be endued with power from on high, meaning the Holy Spirit. This was done on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 and Peter quotes a prophecy from Joel 2 as being fullfilled that day. The point I am making is this: Jesus told them that "all things" written concerning Him are fullfilled, but then gives them instructions which will fullfill other things written concerning Him, the gospel, and the church. Obviously, by all things He didn't mean every single prophecy and text in the OT had been fullfilled, but rather that all concerning His sufferings.

No problem for me, I do not deny OT promises are fulfilled in and by the Church. It's dispies that deny this. But lets go back to the verse I quoted, what "all things written" was Luke referring to?

Luk 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

And did you not infer that these things must be fulfilled again?

 

[RAdam]

Owen's view of 2 Peter 3 has gone to be one of the craziest views on biblical prophecy I've ever seen. That chapter is about as straightforward as any in the entire bible, yet he somehow materialized his own views of heavens and earth. He had no justification for that.

 

[Grasshopper]

Owen's view of 2 Peter 3 has gone to be one of the craziest views on biblical prophecy I've ever seen. That chapter is about as straightforward as any in the entire bible, yet he somehow materialized his own views of heavens and earth. He had no justification for that.

And you claim to know the mind set of 1st century Hebrews? Do you not know the OT was their foundation for the words of Jesus and the other NT writers? Perhaps you dismiss the great John Owen to quickly. How ever before there was Hal Lindsey there was John Lightfoot:

"That the destruction of Jerusalem is very frequently expressed in Scripture as if it were the destruction of the whole world, Deut. 32:22; "A fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.' Jer. 4:23; 'I beheld the earth, and lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light,' &c. The discourse there also is concerning the destruction of that nation, Isa. 65:17; 'Behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered,' &c. And more passages of this sort among the prophets. According to this sense, Christ speaks in this place; and Peter speaks in his Second Epistle, third chapter; and John, in the sixth of the Revelation; and Paul, 2 Cor. 5:17, &c. (vol. 2, pp. 18-19)
"With the same reference it is, that the times and state of things immediately following the destruction of Jerusalem are called 'a new creation,' new heavens,' and 'a new earth.' When should that be? Read the whole chapter; and you will find the Jews rejected and cut off; and from that time is that new creation of the evangelical world among the Gentiles.

Before there was John Hagee there was John Brown:

'Heaven and earth passing,' understood literally, is the dissolution of the present system of the universe, and the period when that is to take place, is called the 'end of the world.' But a person at all familiar with the phraseology of the Old Testament Scriptures, knows that the dissolution of the Mosaic economy, and the establishment of the Christian, is often spoken of as the removing of the old earth and heavens, and the creation of a new earth and new heavens"

Before there was Tim LaHaye there was Jonathan Edwards:

"The Scriptures further teach us to call the gospel-restoration and redemption, a creation of a new heaven and a new earth.... ("The Perpetuity and Change of the Sabbath"

"And the dissolution of the Jewish state was often spoken of in the Old Testament as the end of the world. But we who belong to the gospel-church, belong to the new creation; and therefore there seems to be at least as much reason, that we should commemorate the work of this creation, as that the members of the ancient Jewish church should commemorate the work of the old creation."

Before there was TBN there was Charles Spurgeon:

"Did you ever regret the absence of the burnt-offering, or the red heifer, of any one of the sacrifices and rites of the Jews? Did you ever pine for the feast of tabernacle, or the dedication? No, because, though these were like the old heavens and earth to the Jewish believers, they have passed away, and we now live under a new heavens and a new earth, so far as the dispensation of divine teaching is concerned. The substance is come, and the shadow has gone: and we do not remember it."

Before there was you there was Sir Isaac Newton:

"The figurative language of the prophets is taken from the analogy between the world natural and an empire or kingdom considered as a world politic. Accordingly, the world natural, consisting of heaven and earth, signifies the whole world politic, consisting of thrones and people, or so much of it as is considered in prophecy; and the things in that world signify the analogous things in this. For the heavens and the things therein signify thrones and dignities, and those who enjoy them: and the earth, with the things thereon, the inferior people; and the lowest parts of the earth, called Hades or Hell, the lowest or most miserable part of them. Great earthquakes, and the shaking of heaven and earth, are put for the shaking of kingdoms, so as to distract and overthrow them; the creating of a new heaven and earth, and the passing of an old one; or the beginning and end of a world, for the rise and ruin of a body politic signified thereby. The sun, for the whole species and race of kings, in the kingdoms of the world politic; the moon, for the body of common people considered as the king's wife; the starts, for subordinate princes and great men; or for bishops and rulers of the people of God, when the sun is Christ. Setting of the sun, moon, and stars; darkening the sun, turning the moon into blood, and falling of the stars, for the ceasing of a kingdom."


Another example of "heaven and earth" being referred to the Covenant World of Israel, and not literal creation, is Isaiah 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.

Notice that God is speaking to Israel. He says he gave them his law, the Old Covenant, the same law Jesus is speaking about in Matthew 5:17-18, to establish heaven and lay the foundation of the earth!

http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/n/new-heavens-earth.html

 

[RAdam]

I don't claim to know the mindset of 1st century Jews, I claim to know the eastern mindset, of which the Jews, and other groups from that region, have. Western mindset is to see prophecy and wait for some one time fullfillment. Eastern mindset is to understand that history repeats itself and that the many apostacies over time are proof that scripture is right and a sign of a future ultimate fullfillment. Likewise, the 1st century Jewish Christian would have understood what Christ meant, mainly that not all of prophecy was fullfilled in AD 70, which is really a ridiculous notion anyway.

Now, Owen, and others, make a common mistake. They take the unclear, difficult sections of scripture, form an idea about that, and then use that to interpret the clear sections of scripture. This is not a good rule of biblical interpretation. The best rule of biblical interpretation is to look at the clear sections of scripture, take them at what they say, and then use them to try to understand the more difficult sections. For instance, many form their ideas concerning eschatology from Revelation and Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, and then turn around and use that to interpret the eschatological sections of the epistles. The result is wresting scripture. 2 Peter is a clear, straightforward epistle. Peter uses clear language. Read the first 2 chapters. Peter isn't using symbolism. He says there will be false teachers. He talks about the world of Noah being destroyed by water. He talks about Sodom being destroyed. He talks about these things in clear language. Yet, when we get to chapter 3, we are supposed to swallow the idea that all of the sudden the world, the heavens and the earth, and earth and the works therein doesn't mean those things at all, but rather that Peter is picturing the Jewish state and all of this? Really? The earth standing out of the water and in the water doesn't refer to God creating the earth? The world that then was (by the way, Peter wrote this befor the destruction of Jerusalem, so the Jewish state wasn't a past reality but a present reality) being overflowed with water and perishing doesn't refer to the flood in the days of Noah, already referred to in chapter 2? The heavens and earth that are now don't refer to the present state of the earth? The earth and the works that are therein, the very elements being burned up and melting with a fervent heat don't refer to the destruction of this sin cursed earth when Jesus returns? The new heavens and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness (gonna have a hard time making this the church) doesn't refer to a future state of the earth recreated in perfection and righteousness, inhabited by God's people also remade in the image of Christ? I respect Owen and his view of the atonement, but he, and others, have horribly twisted that chapter of scripture. That is a really clear section of scripture and your take on it has made it incredibly complex. How in the world do you preach that chapter? I know it says heaven and earth here folks, but that's not what Peter meant. Really? Do people buy that?

People have taken eschatology, which isn't that difficult a subject in scripture, and they have made it so complex that the guy on the pew can't understand it. While there are certain aspects that I don't understand, and if you are honest you will admit this as well, there are aspects described in really clear language in the epistles that one simply cannot get around without twisting, as Owen has. When the bible is clear, we should take it at face value. When the bible isn't as clear, we should be careful.

 

[RAdam]

By the way, preterism is an incredible disservice to scripture. I would strongly urge you to rethink taking their position.

 

[BobRyan]

Bob said of the Lisbon Earthquake, Dark Day, Moon turned to the color of blood and the great 1833 star fall event --
2. The careful reader will note that in each case above - secular authorities recognize the sign given as changing the course of history by starting some entire branch of science and study for mankind - since the event is so hard to "ignore" -- it is so massively significant EVEN to secular auhorities.

Eric
OK, but this is not the criteria of biblical fulfillment.

You have dodged the point instead of answering it.

I point to the great tribulation of Matt 24 -- the Dark Ages.

I point to the fulfilled signs of Matt 24 that were to follow -- the dark day, the moon turns to blood and the stars fall. I even show that the Rev 6 sequence is followed in that reguard.

I then show that the events selected for that fulfillment are not simply "arbitrarily noticed by historicists because they work out with scripture" - point that even secular authorities who care not a wit for historicist interpretation -- "notice those events" as being historic "firsts" -- historically "unique" such that they actualy BEGIN whole branches of science.

Your answer is of the form "I am pretending not to notice" the same significance that even secular authorities admit to -- which in this case is the most minimal level.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

1. Apostasy of the church resulting in the 1260 years of dark ages persecution of the saints.

Apostacy was occuring in the 1st century. Read Galations, Hebrews etc....

Not at the level of the dark ages. Differences inside a local church were not equivocated by Paul to the level of Dark Ages centuries long apostacy slaughtering upwards of 50 million saints.

Obviously.

2. Man of lawlessness – son of destruction (an antichrist) – leading the Christian church in that apostasy

Man of Lawlessness was already at work in the 1st century.

Nothing of the kind is stated in 2Thess 2.

2Thess 2
1 Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,
2 that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.
3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,
4 who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.

5 Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things?

6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed.
7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.
8 Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming;


9 that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders,[/b]

Paul is very clear in pointing out that the saints are "Gathered together to Christ" at the 2nd coming (in 2Thess 2).

Matthew points out that they are gathered from the four corners of the Earth by the Angels - to Christ in Matt 24 -- at the 2nd coming.

Paul says that even the dead saints are raised at the 2nd coming in 1Thess 4.

Jesus said that He comes to take us back with Him to Heaven - in John 14.

John further points out in Rev 19 that when Jesus comes -- He wipes out all sinners.

Peter says in 1Peter 1:13 that the NT saints are STILL to keep looking forward to that 2nd coming event.

1. Apostasy of the church resulting in the 1260 years of dark ages persecution of the saints.
2. Man of lawlessness – son of destruction (an antichrist) – leading the Christian church in that apostasy
3. Antichrist exalting himself – as seated in the temple of God – God on earth
4. The Rev 7 “restraint” will be removed (Future to today)
5. Power signs and false wonders to be seen: “ whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders" -- (future to today - obviously)
6. whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming (Another future event)

-- thus a future apostacy is predicted. (And of course Historians find the 1260 years of the Dark Ages "hard to miss")

-- even while PRESENT tribulation and persecution is fully admitted -


2Thess 1 -

6 For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you,
7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when theLord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire,
8 dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.

 

[Eric B]

You have dodged the point instead of answering it.

I point to the great tribulation of Matt 24 -- the Dark Ages.

I point to the fulfilled signs of Matt 24 that were to follow -- the dark day, the moon turns to blood and the stars fall. I even show that the Rev 6 sequence is followed in that reguard.

I then show that the events selected for that fulfillment are not simply "arbitrarily noticed by historicists because they work out with scripture" - point that even secular authorities who care not a wit for historicist interpretation -- "notice those events" as being historic "firsts" -- historically "unique" such that they actualy BEGIN whole branches of science.

Your answer is of the form "I am pretending not to notice" the same significance that even secular authorities admit to -- which in this case is the most minimal level.

in Christ,

Bob

I have not dodged the question, because there is no answer. The question is illegitimate.
Where is the criteria for the fulfillment of the prophecy ever said to be "secular proplr would say it is significant"?

I know you might try to say this was a fulfillment of Rev.6:15-17, but that would be QUITE a stretch. However, notice v.14. Would you honestly say that was fulfilled then?

 

[Grasshopper]

I don't claim to know the mindset of 1st century Jews, I claim to know the eastern mindset, of which the Jews, and other groups from that region, have. Western mindset is to see prophecy and wait for some one time fullfillment. Eastern mindset is to understand that history repeats itself and that the many apostacies over time are proof that scripture is right and a sign of a future ultimate fullfillment.

So then we should be anticipating another Messiah to come? Just what prophecies have multiple fulfillments and which ones don't? And who decides, you?

Likewise, the 1st century Jewish Christian would have understood what Christ meant,

Actually the Disciples didn't understand much of what Jesus spoke. They never did accept the fact that he would have to die.

mainly that not all of prophecy was fullfilled in AD 70, which is really a ridiculous notion anyway.

So rediculous you are unable to answer my question of what "all things written" refer to.

Luk 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Remember, you say the events of the Olivet Discourse occured in AD70:

"Jesus used the destruction of Jerusalem as a type "

"Matthew 24 should be read this way. It is about the fall of Jerusalem and the ultimate second coming of Christ. The first is a picture of the second,"

So what "all thing written" was Luke talking about and do you expect them all to be fulfilled again?

Now, Owen, and others, make a common mistake. They take the unclear, difficult sections of scripture, form an idea about that, and then use that to interpret the clear sections of scripture.

No, they take their knowledge of OT apocalyptic language and consistantly apply it in the NT. By the way, time statments are the most clear and easy concepts to interpret yet are ignored and twisted by interpreters like you..

This is not a good rule of biblical interpretation. The best rule of biblical interpretation is to look at the clear sections of scripture, take them at what they say, and then use them to try to understand the more difficult sections.

You mean like simple time-statements?

For instance, many form their ideas concerning eschatology from Revelation and Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, and then turn around and use that to interpret the eschatological sections of the epistles.

Did Peter and Paul teach a dfferent eschatology than Jesus?

The result is wresting scripture. 2 Peter is a clear, straightforward epistle. Peter uses clear language.

Has heaven and earth passed, or are we still under the Law?

Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Read the first 2 chapters. Peter isn't using symbolism. He says there will be false teachers.

Jud 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Jud 1:17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; Jud 1:18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts

False teachers are all over the NT.

He talks about the world of Noah being destroyed by water. He talks about Sodom being destroyed. He talks about these things in clear language.

When God destroyed the "world" with the flood, did the physical earth cease to exist? Or was He speaking of people?

Yet, when we get to chapter 3, we are supposed to swallow the idea that all of the sudden the world, the heavens and the earth, and earth and the works therein doesn't mean those things at all, but rather that Peter is picturing the Jewish state and all of this?

No, you are suppose to swallow that the locusts of Revelation are actually Cobra helicopters piloted by the Russians.

I'll choose to let the OT define terms for me. I'll quote again Sir Isaac Newton:

"The figurative language of the prophets is taken from the analogy between the world natural and an empire or kingdom considered as a world politic. Accordingly, the world natural, consisting of heaven and earth, signifies the whole world politic, consisting of thrones and people, or so much of it as is considered in prophecy; and the things in that world signify the analogous things in this. For the heavens and the things therein signify thrones and dignities, and those who enjoy them: and the earth, with the things thereon, the inferior people; and the lowest parts of the earth, called Hades or Hell, the lowest or most miserable part of them. Great earthquakes, and the shaking of heaven and earth, are put for the shaking of kingdoms, so as to distract and overthrow them; the creating of a new heaven and earth, and the passing of an old one; or the beginning and end of a world, for the rise and ruin of a body politic signified thereby. The sun, for the whole species and race of kings, in the kingdoms of the world politic; the moon, for the body of common people considered as the king's wife; the starts, for subordinate princes and great men; or for bishops and rulers of the people of God, when the sun is Christ. Setting of the sun, moon, and stars; darkening the sun, turning the moon into blood, and falling of the stars, for the ceasing of a kingdom."

If you deny this fine, it makes no difference to me but the OT is clear on the use of this language.

Really? The earth standing out of the water and in the water doesn't refer to God creating the earth?

Are you saying this does:

Isaiah 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.

 

[Grasshopper]

The world that then was (by the way, Peter wrote this befor the destruction of Jerusalem, so the Jewish state wasn't a past reality but a present reality) being overflowed with water and perishing doesn't refer to the flood in the days of Noah, already referred to in chapter 2?

You seemed confused, Peter's prediction of the destruction of the Mosaic Economy was still future to him:

2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
2Pe 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.

Again, what "world" was destroyed in the past?

The heavens and earth that are now don't refer to the present state of the earth? The earth and the works that are therein, the very elements being burned up and melting with a fervent heat don't refer to the destruction of this sin cursed earth when Jesus returns?

No it doesn't, and do a word study on the use of "elements" in the NT and tell me what you come up with. When do you believe the New H&E come, at the end of the church age or end of the 1000 years as BobRyan.

The new heavens and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness (gonna have a hard time making this the church)

Really? Christ didn't usher in Righteousness?

2Co 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
Gal 3:21Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
Rom 14:17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.


No righteousness? Christ brought in righteousness with the New Covenant.

doesn't refer to a future state of the earth recreated in perfection and righteousness, inhabited by God's people also remade in the image of Christ?

Are you not a new creation made in the image of Christ?

Rom 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

I respect Owen and his view of the atonement, but he, and others, have horribly twisted that chapter of scripture. That is a really clear section of scripture and your take on it has made it incredibly complex. How in the world do you preach that chapter?

I don't, I'm not a preacher, but this man does:

http://www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/eschatology/global_holo.htm

If you would wish to listen: http://www.worldwithoutend.info/start/audios/olivet.htm

I know it says heaven and earth here folks, but that's not what Peter meant. Really? Do people buy that?

Easier to buy that than how dispies try to reconcile Isaiah 65-66 to 2 Peter 3 to Revelation 21-22.

People have taken eschatology, which isn't that difficult a subject in scripture, and they have made it so complex that the guy on the pew can't understand it. While there are certain aspects that I don't understand, and if you are honest you will admit this as well, there are aspects described in really clear language in the epistles that one simply cannot get around without twisting, as Owen has. When the bible is clear, we should take it at face value. When the bible isn't as clear, we should be careful.

You mean clear like this:

Rev 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.

Pretty clear Huh?

 

[Grasshopper]

By the way, preterism is an incredible disservice to scripture. I would strongly urge you to rethink taking their position.

Hate to break this to you but if you see the Olivet Discourse being fulfilled in the events of AD70 you are a preterist in some form. Welcome to the club, we are growing.:love2:

 

[BobRyan]

I know you might try to say this was a fulfillment of Rev.6:15-17, but that would be QUITE a stretch. However, notice v.14. Would you honestly say that was fulfilled then?

The preterists love to claim that if one section was fulfilled then ALL the texts are in the past. I am not preterist -- but rather historicist.

12 I looked when He broke the sixth seal[/b], and there was a [b]great earthquake; and the sun became black[/b] as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became like blood[/b];
13 and the stars of the sky fell[/b] to the earth, as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wind.
14 The sky was split apart like a scroll[/b] when it is rolled up, and [b]every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
15 Then the kings of the earth[/b] and the great men and the commanders and the rich and the strong and every slave and free[/b] man hid themselves in the cave[/b]s and among the rocks of the mountains;
16 and they said to the mountains and to the rocks, ""Fall on us and hide us[/b] from the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;[/b]
17 for the great day of their wrath[/b] has come, and who is able to stand?''

Thus I have never said that vs 14-17 are fullilled. But I have said that 12 and 13 are.

Which places us IN history - between 13 and 14.

Matt 24 - (speaking of events following the 1260 years of dark ages persecution of the saints)

Matt 24
29 ""But [b]immediately after the tribulation of those days THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
30 And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and [b]they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory.
31 ""And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect[/b] from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.


Thus we are between vs 29 and 30 "in history" -- after the "stars will fall from the sky" statement.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[billwald]

These verses are (only) an OT poetical way of saying "bad things will happen" and should not be pressed for any details. It should be obvious that an astronomical giant gas ball of a hydrogen bomb we call a star can't fall to earth. Or are the stars really only little specks of light that float in the air (sky?)?



12 I looked when He broke the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became like blood[/b];
13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth, as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wind.
14 The sky was split apart like a scroll[/b] when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
15 Then the kings of the earth and the great men and the commanders and the rich and the strong and every slave and free man hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains;
16 and they said to the mountains and to the rocks, ""Fall on us and hide us from the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;
17 for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?''

 

[BobRyan]

What we call today a "shooting star" or a "falling star" is not a reference to some rogue solar-system crashing into earth -- as we all know.

=========
The secular authorities that attest to these historic events have no interest at all in the "historicist method" yet they all declare that these events were historically remarkable.


Lisbon EarthQuake
Encyclopedia Americana, article `Lisbon', note (ed. 1831).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1755_Lisbon_earthquake
The 1755 Lisbon earthquake, also known as the Great Lisbon Earthquake, took place on 1 November 1755, at around 9:40 in the morning.[1] The earthquake was followed by a tsunami and fires, which caused near-total destruction of Lisbon in the Kingdom of Portugal, and adjoining areas. Geologists today estimate the Lisbon earthquake approached magnitude 9 on the Moment magnitude scale, with an epicenter in the Atlantic Ocean about 200 km (120 mi) west-southwest of Cape St. Vincent. Estimates place the death toll in Lisbon alone between 10,000 and 100,000 people,[2] making it one of the most destructive earthquakes in history.[/U]
The earthquake accentuated political tensions in the Kingdom of Portugal and profoundly disrupted the country's eighteenth-century colonial ambitions. The event was widely discussed and dwelt upon by European Enlightenmentphilosophers, and inspired major developments in theodicy and in the philosophy of the sublime. As the first earthquake studied scientifically for its effects over a large area, it led to the birth of modern seismology and earthquake engineering.[/U]


Dark Day –
Noah Webster's Unabridged Dictionary, Vocabulary of the Names of Noted ... Persons and Places, ed. 1869, 1882 & 1883.
"The Dark Day, May 19, 1780 -- so-called on account of a remarkable[/U] darkness on that day extending over all New England ... The obscuration began about ten o'clock in the morning, and continued till the middle of the next night, but with difference and duration in different places ... The true cause of this remarkable phenomena is not known."[/U]

Stars Fall
One of the greatest meteor storms ever seen took place nearly 166 years ago over the eastern United States. During the 4 hours which preceded dawn on Nov. 13, 1833,
…
The storm marked the discovery of the annual Leonids meteor shower and is widely regarded as the birth of modern meteor astronomy.
http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast22jun99_2.htm

How instructive that the "Same sequence" seen in history is predicted by John in Rev 6.

 

[Eric B]

The preterists love to claim that if one section was fulfilled then ALL the texts are in the past. I am not preterist -- but rather historicist.

12 I looked when He broke the sixth seal[/b], and there was a [b]great earthquake; and the sun became black[/b] as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became like blood[/b];
13 and the stars of the sky fell[/b] to the earth, as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wind.
14 The sky was split apart like a scroll[/b] when it is rolled up, and [b]every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
15 Then the kings of the earth[/b] and the great men and the commanders and the rich and the strong and every slave and free[/b] man hid themselves in the cave[/b]s and among the rocks of the mountains;
16 and they said to the mountains and to the rocks, ""Fall on us and hide us[/b] from the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;[/b]
17 for the great day of their wrath[/b] has come, and who is able to stand?''

Thus I have never said that vs 14-17 are fullilled. But I have said that 12 and 13 are.

Which places us IN history - between 13 and 14.

Matt 24 - (speaking of events following the 1260 years of dark ages persecution of the saints)

Matt 24
29 ""But [b]immediately after the tribulation of those days THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
30 And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and [b]they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDSOF THE SKY with power and great glory.
31 ""And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect[/b] from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.

Thus we are between vs 29 and 30 "in history" -- after the "stars will fall from the sky" statement.

Where in those texts is there any indeterminable amount of time? You just plug in each event to these terms, and then come up with these gaps that aren't there, simply because the events in real life did not play out that way. But it looks like a quick sequence to me.
And again, where is "the secular authorities will acknowledge it as significant" in there? That's what I thought you might try to say fulfilled 15-17.

 

[RAdam]

Preterism is the result of bad methods of biblical interpretation. Rather than using the clearer language of the epistles to try to understand the more difficult language of the book of Revelation at the Olivet Discourse, they do exactly the opposite. The result is they are then forced to allegorize what are clearly fairly literal and clear sections of scripture.

I want to bring up two quick things. First, both Peter and Paul refer to the last days as a future event in epistles written around the mid 60's AD. In 2 Peter 3 he says, "there shall come in the last days scoffers..." There shall come, not there currently are. Peter obviously believes he is not in the last days, that they are yet to come. Couple that with the statement that a day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. What point is that statement if Peter is discussing events that will come about within a decade, if not within 4-5 years? If, on the other hand, he is discussing an event at least 2,000 years away, then it make sense. Then Paul, in 2 Timothy 3 says, "in the last days perilous times shall come..." Again, shall come. Paul, writing around the same time as Peter's second epistle, doesn't believe he is in the last days. He says things like, "men shall be lovers of their own selves..." Shall be? Shouldn't he say they already are if the events of that text are going to come about within a decade?

Secondly, Peter is clearly describing the creation of the physical world when he talks about the earth standing out of the water and in the water by the word of God. That's straight out of Genesis 1. Then he describes events that look an aweful lot like the flood of Noah's day. Then he describes a future event, in which the world created by God would be destroyed and a new heavens and earth would be created. Peter has been very clear and very literal thus far in his second epistle, yet all of the sudden everything is symbolic. Though it looks like he is talking about the literal world, we are supposed to believe that he isn't? It just doesn't make sense. It is bad biblical interpretation.

 

[Eric B]

According to Joshepus, events did progress very quickly toward that state os sin in those last few years, aftetr the epistles were written. so yes, they could speak of "the last days" as future. But then, we have the last days described as current, also.

"a thousand years and a thousand years as one day" was spoken of in the context of the comarison to Noah's day. God destroyed "the world" then, and to God, that was like a day ago; hence, He has "not changed", and the same principle was at work with that generation. That does not mean when Christ tells people that they shall live to see the end, then that must still be somehow thousands of years also. That is a very clear and literal statement that your side has allegorized away. (It means "the generation that is there 'when these things begin'", which is NOT what He says!)

 

[RAdam]

The "one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" thing is not referring to the days of Noah. Peter is discussing the promise of His coming, meaning His second coming. The scoffers that are going to come in the last days are going to say He isn't coming back, and their argument will be that everything has continued to move along as it always has. Peter then makes the point that there was time in the past when things didn't move along business as usual. God destroyed the old world in the flood in the days of Noah, which is a type of the judgement that will come on our world at the second coming. Then Peter says that by the same word that created the world God is reserving this present world unto destruction at that last day. Then, at this point, Peter refers to the one day, thousand years statement. Then, right after that, he says the Lord is not slack concerning His promise (of His second coming), but is longsuffering to usward. Where have I allegorized that statement? Peter is making the point that time means nothing to God in between statements that God is going to destroy the world and that He isn't slack concerning His promise. The implications are clear - Peter is saying that a long passage of time between His first and second advent shouldn't be seen as proof that He isn't coming back because time has no meaning to God. Instead Peter assures us He will come back, but that right now is being longsuffering to usward.