An Examination of Revelation 1:7: Futurism vs. Preterism

[thomas15]

Thomas

Finally we have found some common ground we agree on. I’d say that some dude posting his futuristic fantasies on the internet about dispensationalism is a great case in point.

Basically that is what we have in John Darby—just a dude who went around to prophecy conferences and did his dog and pony show about his new way of rightly dividing the Word.

The major difference between you and me being that I have in my defense of pre-mill theology the Word of God on my side. I operate on the assumption that Jehovah can and did give us in the Bible the words to communicate in plain language those things that He wants us to know. And those words are nothing but headaches for those who think Jesus returned and set up the promised Kingdom in AD 70.

Unanswered by the preterist crowd is the issue of communion in the church assuming as they do that we are in the Kingdom. Another question would be why support missionaries or witness to the Gospel since in the kingdom, all will have knowledge of the Lord, from the least to the greatest. And how many times Logos1 do you obey the command from Jehovah to yearly visit Jerusalem? We are told that woe to those who do not do so...once the kingdom rule starts. These are questions you cannot answer without giving yourself whiplash.


The following will probably get me in trouble, but anyway...

I was thinking about this matter, the arguement for and against preterism last night. I could, if I were to be convinced by the preterist arguement, change my view on this without much personal studdering because my personal theology is basically that: personal. I'm not in the professional ministry, I don't have a blog or facebook, I'm not in the pulpit espousing my views and I keep my discussion strictly on the gospel to my friends and co-workers.

Basically theology is a hobby although I have some Bible school credits and I own books from just about every perspective and viewpoint in modern theology as well as doctrinal history and the ECFs, I have over 1000 hard copy books in my personal library on theology topics including 14 full and or multi-volume systematic theology works. I actually have more works from those of whom I disagree with than from authors I do agree with.

And not that I care what anyone (dudes and all) on the internets think about me or my beliefs and not trying to act like I have some kind of advanced knowledge on the subject. But dudes like you Logos1, (*tom and econoclass) have painted yourselves so far into a corner with what I personally call "goofball theology" that I actually pity you. I spent a couple of years studying cults like JWs and one thing becomes clear, many people stay in them long after they decide it's silly mainly because they spent so much time and effort trying to convince people it is the truth that they cannot face the chorus of "i told you so" that will come if they changed course. In a word, pride is what keeps many JWs in the fold.

I have said this many times on this forum that the real debate, at least in my mind is not dispy vs. preterist or A-mil vs. pre-mil.. The real debate is Dispensationalism vs. Covenant theology. No one can be preterist without first being Covenant, so debate with you over this preterist thing is like trying to decide what color the vanilla cake icing on your birthday cake will be this year.

When the reformed covenant theologians start talking about darby, like because darby published his views in the 1800s, a couple 100 years after the reformers and thus is a jonny-come-lately, not deserving of any crediability because he is shinny and new, that arguement is weak if you place the agruement in the hands of Scripture. New or old, this issue is not about the age of the teaching or doctrine, rather does the Bible teach your position? Is your doctrine Biblical? That is the question. If darby is such a 4 letter word in theology, then how do you (or your covenant theologian brethern) explain the Geneva Bible notes by the esteemed reformers that refer to the Roman popes as the anti-christ?

So, I may not have a blog on the internets or a book with my name on the title page or a weekly paycheck from a ministry but in spite of that handicap, I have yet, and not for lack of effort, ever found a place in the Holy Bible where Jehovah God ever cut a covenant of works or a covenat of grace or a covenant of redemption with sinful man. When I look at the New Covenant, details in Jer ch 31 and apply a small amount of brain power and study, I find that one of the reasons why the church must continue the Lords Table until the Savior returns is becaue the New Covenant, terms and conditions spelled out in Jer ch 31 await fufillment which the Savior Himself will do when He returns. It's really that simple.

 

[Logos1]

Hello Hank,

I think the common misconception here is that the coming in (Acts v 11) doesn’t address coming back to earth—it means come in to heaven. Remember the apostles are trying to convince their audience that Jesus is the true messiah and only the true messiah would go to heaven when he left earth. In this verse where he is going is more important than coming back. That is why two (not one but two) angels testify as to his coming into heaven.

As to Zechariah 14:3 check out the Hebrew interlinear it says “fight in nations” it doesn’t say against. Further, we know that the only Israel or Jerusalem that the bible would ever talk about is one that is in a covenant relationship with God and their covenant came to a complete end with the 70AD destruction of the temple so all prophecy concerning the Jews has to be fulfilled by 70AD. Obviously he wasn’t fighting on behalf of the Jews in 70 AD, but coming in judgment of them.

I think you are mistaken to try to tie Act 1:11 to the Zechariah verses and come up with a literal return of Christ to earth. Sorry I just can’t buy it.

I think Zechariah 14 is an amazingly pro preterist chapter that gives a very detailed description of 70AD.

Logos1

 

[Logos1]

When we meet on the other side

So when Jesus spoke of the people in Torments seeing the ones in Paradise he wasn't describing those in torments seeing what goes on in the spiritual world? Even though I believe Paradise abode of Hades was transfered to Heaven, those soul in torments will see Him as He returns as much as those from earth will.

Please provide the proof that they believed the world was flat in that day.
Just because it was prevelant in the 1400's A.D. doesn't mean it was prevelant teaching at the time. Scripture seems to bear out a round earth.

I will continue to believe in His return until:
1. I die
or
2. until He returns.

The thing is if you are truly saved, I am not questioning it because I would say that to anyone I don't know your heart only your testifying you are, you to will meet Him in the air even if you don't believe it.

I can’t believe anyone who has studied at a seminary could miss this—remember those times as in Rev 7:1, Isaiah 11:12 where it speaks of the four corners of the earth. You know as in flat with four corners.

I don’t think any serious person would try to suggest they didn’t believe the earth was the center of the universe at that period. Indeed, one of the biggest black marks on the church in history was trying to refute the move away from the belief that the earth was at the center of the universe.

Would you like to find a place where the bible suggests the earth is round?

Of course the Holy Spirit knew it was round but that doesn’t mean that it was important to the bible writers to understand that and clearly they didn’t.

Would like to suggest a time when religious leaders unlearned any belief that the world was round and started to believe it was flat.

Sometimes I almost think waiting so long for the return of Christ in the context of soon coming being a true statement and 2000 plus years qualifies as soon has totally distorted futurist’s understanding of about anything and everything.

I’m sure we will meet in heaven one day and when we know more then than we do now and are all preterists then—don’t worry I won’t hold any of this against you. I bet we will laugh at it.

 

[Logos1]

Mirror Mirror on the wall who's the slickest one of all

Well, as least you are able to "mirror" for all of us to see the "love of the Lord"...

Question for you concerns daniel Chapter 12

God tells the Prophet that In last days , Micheal the prince arises to help and save the jewish peoples during a time of "great distress. like NONE ever before/simce" and that a resurrection will be happening at that time...

Future event, or already done, if so, when was that in history past fulfilled?

Also, God pretty specific on dating times from the "Abomination of Desolation" already fulfilled event. or still to come?

JF thank you for proving my point that you use these slick references to the bible to distort what it really says to change the meaning to support your position.

It doesn’t say anything about saving the Jewish people. Let me copy and paste the actual verse
Daniel 12:1
Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

At that time
Michael the great prince
who stands watch over your people will rise up.
There will be a time of distress
such as never has occurred
since nations came into being until that time.
But at that time all your people
who are found written in the book will escape.

This is a clear and direct reference to Christians (notice name written in the book—as in lamb’s book of life) not the Jewish people. This is a clear reference to the events 66 – 70 AD.

I’d like to see you mirror the bible a little instead of trying pull fast ones over on us.

 

[Logos1]

If Christ did come down from heaven and every eye were to see him

The major difference between you and me being that I have in my defense of pre-mill theology the Word of God on my side. I operate on the assumption that Jehovah can and did give us in the Bible the words to communicate in plain language those things that He wants us to know. And those words are nothing but headaches for those who think Jesus returned and set up the promised Kingdom in AD 70.

Unanswered by the preterist crowd is the issue of communion in the church assuming as they do that we are in the Kingdom. Another question would be why support missionaries or witness to the Gospel since in the kingdom, all will have knowledge of the Lord, from the least to the greatest. And how many times Logos1 do you obey the command from Jehovah to yearly visit Jerusalem? We are told that woe to those who do not do so...once the kingdom rule starts. These are questions you cannot answer without giving yourself whiplash.


The following will probably get me in trouble, but anyway...

I was thinking about this matter, the arguement for and against preterism last night. I could, if I were to be convinced by the preterist arguement, change my view on this without much personal studdering because my personal theology is basically that: personal. I'm not in the professional ministry, I don't have a blog or facebook, I'm not in the pulpit espousing my views and I keep my discussion strictly on the gospel to my friends and co-workers.

Basically theology is a hobby although I have some Bible school credits and I own books from just about every perspective and viewpoint in modern theology as well as doctrinal history and the ECFs, I have over 1000 hard copy books in my personal library on theology topics including 14 full and or multi-volume systematic theology works. I actually have more works from those of whom I disagree with than from authors I do agree with.

And not that I care what anyone (dudes and all) on the internets think about me or my beliefs and not trying to act like I have some kind of advanced knowledge on the subject. But dudes like you Logos1, (*tom and econoclass) have painted yourselves so far into a corner with what I personally call "goofball theology" that I actually pity you. I spent a couple of years studying cults like JWs and one thing becomes clear, many people stay in them long after they decide it's silly mainly because they spent so much time and effort trying to convince people it is the truth that they cannot face the chorus of "i told you so" that will come if they changed course. In a word, pride is what keeps many JWs in the fold.

I have said this many times on this forum that the real debate, at least in my mind is not dispy vs. preterist or A-mil vs. pre-mil.. The real debate is Dispensationalism vs. Covenant theology. No one can be preterist without first being Covenant, so debate with you over this preterist thing is like trying to decide what color the vanilla cake icing on your birthday cake will be this year.

When the reformed covenant theologians start talking about darby, like because darby published his views in the 1800s, a couple 100 years after the reformers and thus is a jonny-come-lately, not deserving of any crediability because he is shinny and new, that arguement is weak if you place the agruement in the hands of Scripture. New or old, this issue is not about the age of the teaching or doctrine, rather does the Bible teach your position? Is your doctrine Biblical? That is the question. If darby is such a 4 letter word in theology, then how do you (or your covenant theologian brethern) explain the Geneva Bible notes by the esteemed reformers that refer to the Roman popes as the anti-christ?

So, I may not have a blog on the internets or a book with my name on the title page or a weekly paycheck from a ministry but in spite of that handicap, I have yet, and not for lack of effort, ever found a place in the Holy Bible where Jehovah God ever cut a covenant of works or a covenat of grace or a covenant of redemption with sinful man. When I look at the New Covenant, details in Jer ch 31 and apply a small amount of brain power and study, I find that one of the reasons why the church must continue the Lords Table until the Savior returns is becaue the New Covenant, terms and conditions spelled out in Jer ch 31 await fufillment which the Savior Himself will do when He returns. It's really that simple.

I don’t really need to comment on your blogs, facebook, or preaching or lack thereof.

Funny, I was just thinking today also how obvious it is that all of the bible was written and wrapped up by 70 AD and how that makes so much sense in the big scheme of things.

Sometimes it would be nice if the apostles were around after 70 AD and still writing and saying that the return of Christ took place in 70 AD, but it isn’t really necessary.

Everything that needed to be said had been said already. How can anyone not recognize that the old Covenant ended in 70 AD completely and that forces the New Covenant upon us and of course the return of Christ at that time.

How could we miss that all prophecy is wrapped up by that time and that is why there haven’t been any inspired prophets since then.

Who knows maybe one of the Apostles did survive it and did write to that effect and we just haven’t found the manuscript yet. Now wouldn’t that be an interesting turn of events to find such a document. Just how devastating would that be coupled with the mockery that futurism makes of the soon coming statements of Christ.

We find more and more old writings every year and just suppose such a document turned up one day.

Obviously this might well convince a lot of people that preterism is the correct view of things, but not all of course.

Even if Christ did literally come down out of the sky and every eye saw him and he declared preterism as the correct view of things some of those who have been taught futurism would not be willing to let go of their dogma. They are like the Pharisees who are set in their ways and even Christ standing in front of them in the flesh telling them something different than what they have been taught is not good enough for them.

 

[revmwc]

I can’t believe anyone who has studied at a seminary could miss this—remember those times as in Rev 7:1, Isaiah 11:12 where it speaks of the four corners of the earth. You know as in flat with four corners.

I don’t think any serious person would try to suggest they didn’t believe the earth was the center of the universe at that period. Indeed, one of the biggest black marks on the church in history was trying to refute the move away from the belief that the earth was at the center of the universe.

Would you like to find a place where the bible suggests the earth is round?

Of course the Holy Spirit knew it was round but that doesn’t mean that it was important to the bible writers to understand that and clearly they didn’t.

Would like to suggest a time when religious leaders unlearned any belief that the world was round and started to believe it was flat.

Sometimes I almost think waiting so long for the return of Christ in the context of soon coming being a true statement and 2000 plus years qualifies as soon has totally distorted futurist’s understanding of about anything and everything.

I’m sure we will meet in heaven one day and when we know more then than we do now and are all preterists then—don’t worry I won’t hold any of this against you. I bet we will laugh at it.

Here's a quote from Answers.com:

"No one believed the Earth was flat (beyond present day "Flat Earthers"). This is a myth that has been perpetrated in education because of a mistake made by an early 20th century text book author. Many people were aware that the Earth was a sphere by the 3rd century B.C. Both Claudius Ptolemy and Marinus of Tyre (early geographers) proved that the Earth is a sphere. Working from data compiled centuries before, their calculations, while still inaccurate, where a great improvement on earlier work.

Christopher Columbus did not set out to prove that the world was round, but rather set out to find a faster trade route to Asia, discovering that the Earth was larger than anyone originally believed and discovering North America on behalf of European civilization. North America had been discovered by other populations before then, including the Vikings and of course the Jomon (ancestors of the Japanese), but Columbus' discovery was probably more relevant to modern civilization."

With God all things are possible, so a short time in God's time could be the almost 6000 years the earth has eaxisted and man has been in existence. So 1978 years is not that long of period to God. Since Jesus is God then to say shortly and mean 2000 years is a very short time. Man is the only one constrained by time, God isn't so why do you want to put Him in a box and say shortly would have to mean shortly to man? Again the verse in Peter shows God timetable, one day to the Lord is as a Thousand years and a Thousand years as one day, very simple straight forward, to God it has only been almost two days since Christ ascended that is a very short time. So quickly, or these things will come quickly is in God's time still very applicable.

In Luke jesus told the parable of the unjust steward it ends like this:

Luke 18: 6 And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith 7 And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? 8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

The same Greek word is used tachos in Luke for God avenging his elect Speedily, as the Word Quickly in Revelation 1:1 (shortly), 3:11, Revelation 22:12 and 20. So has God avenged His elect?
We are still being persecuted, the Church was persecuted by Rome until Constantine made the church part of the Roman Governemnt in the 300's A.D.
Then many who stood for the truth were persecuted for it, Tyndale and Wycliffe in the reformation era were persecuted for their faith.
Christians in Sudan and China come to mind today and yet they have yet to be avenged, but Christ said that God would Avenge quickly, Speedily and yet 1978 years and God has not avenged so was Christ lieing to them? No God will avenge His elect and he will do it speedily. Just as Christ will return for His church and then 7 years later to set up His Kingdom speedily, quickly.
Again look at Luke it says when the Son of Man cometh, cometh where, look at the next part, " shall he find faith on the earth?" This would appear He is coming to earth again, not metorphically or spiritually but physically to the Earth. That didn't happen in 70 A.D. and His elect were not avenged in 70 A.D. because the persecution continued after that. So to say He was coming quickly means speedily when He comes it will be speedily and He will avenge His elect quickly.

 

[asterisktom]

I don’t really need to comment on your blogs, facebook, or preaching or lack thereof.

Funny, I was just thinking today also how obvious it is that all of the bible was written and wrapped up by 70 AD and how that makes so much sense in the big scheme of things.

Sometimes it would be nice if the apostles were around after 70 AD and still writing and saying that the return of Christ took place in 70 AD, but it isn’t really necessary.

Everything that needed to be said had been said already. How can anyone not recognize that the old Covenant ended in 70 AD completely and that forces the New Covenant upon us and of course the return of Christ at that time.

How could we miss that all prophecy is wrapped up by that time and that is why there haven’t been any inspired prophets since then.

Who knows maybe one of the Apostles did survive it and did write to that effect and we just haven’t found the manuscript yet. Now wouldn’t that be an interesting turn of events to find such a document. Just how devastating would that be coupled with the mockery that futurism makes of the soon coming statements of Christ.

We find more and more old writings every year and just suppose such a document turned up one day.

Obviously this might well convince a lot of people that preterism is the correct view of things, but not all of course.

Even if Christ did literally come down out of the sky and every eye saw him and he declared preterism as the correct view of things some of those who have been taught futurism would not be willing to let go of their dogma. They are like the Pharisees who are set in their ways and even Christ standing in front of them in the flesh telling them something different than what they have been taught is not good enough for them.

There comes a point when discussing these things hits a cycle. And that is when it is good to just disconnect from the discussion. At least, that is the way I see it.

In my case I will be disconnecting totally from the Internet in a day or two because we are moving. I don't know how long it will be before we get totally settled in Florida.

But one thing that I think that some futurists and Preterists are in agreement about is being tired of the same arguments. I know I am.

For me they have been futile.

You answer the "Every eye will see Him" with the other very common uses of the word "see" (HORAO) like in John 16:16 used in perceptive, not visual, sense - and it makes no impression.

You answer the Zech 14 earthquake Jesus (Mt. Olives splitting) with similar apocalyptic imagery - and it makes no impression. (Also, this twofold division -west/east and north/south - accords very neatly with the historical accounts of Josephus.

Of course quoting Josephus is like quoting Anton Lavey with some people.

I will add this about Communion. It is not geared toward the end of the age. It is something that Christians are free to do, or not do. Personally I have always enjoyed Communion as Preterist just as much as earlier, even more so. Just because the texts say "until" does not mean "until - and after that no more."

Consider the promise that Christ will "reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet." This does not mean that, this point being reached, the enemies are now footloose again, free to run amuck!

Another consideration concerning the assumed cessation of communion is Christ's own words:

“But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that Day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.” - Matt. 26:29

The Preterist sees this as referring to this present age.

OK, I have to keep packing.

 

[revmwc]

There comes a point when discussing these things hits a cycle. And that is when it is good to just disconnect from the discussion. At least, that is the way I see it.

In my case I will be disconnecting totally from the Internet in a day or two because we are moving. I don't know how long it will be before we get totally settled in Florida.

But one thing that I think that some futurists and Preterists are in agreement about is being tired of the same arguments. I know I am.

For me they have been futile.

You answer the "Every eye will see Him" with the other very common uses of the word "see" (HORAO) like in John 16:16 used in perceptive, not visual, sense - and it makes no impression.

You answer the Zech 14 earthquake Jesus (Mt. Olives splitting) with similar apocalyptic imagery - and it makes no impression. (Also, this twofold division -west/east and north/south - accords very neatly with the historical accounts of Josephus.

Of course quoting Josephus is like quoting Anton Lavey with some people.

I will add this about Communion. It is not geared toward the end of the age. It is something that Christians are free to do, or not do. Personally I have always enjoyed Communion as Preterist just as much as earlier, even more so. Just because the texts say "until" does not mean "until - and after that no more."

Consider the promise that Christ will "reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet." This does not mean that, this point being reached, the enemies are now footloose again, free to run amuck!

Another consideration concerning the assumed cessation of communion is Christ's own words:

“But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that Day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.” - Matt. 26:29

The Preterist sees this as referring to this present age.

OK, I have to keep packing.

I really don't see it as futile, maybe to us because we will never convince each other. But if we help others who are reading and not posting of the truth then it has been worth the effort.

So where in Florida are you going, I've worked there with my job 3 different times. It like Texas has no state income tax, I believe there is only one other state that doesn't. But anyway I wouldn't say the effort on this subject is futile at all because we never know who in the background we will convince.
I hope for futurist belief and you hope for your preterist belief.
You thought I just like debating you huh!

 

[asterisktom]

I really don't see it as futile, maybe to us because we will never convince each other. But if we help others who are reading and not posting of the truth then it has been worth the effort.

So where in Florida are you going, I've worked there with my job 3 different times. It like Texas has no state income tax, I believe there is only one other state that doesn't. But anyway I wouldn't say the effort on this subject is futile at all because we never know who in the background we will convince.
I hope for futurist belief and you hope for your preterist belief.
You thought I just like debating you huh!

Yea, sorry, revmwc, I think I was in gloom mode for a while there. I have come to appreciate many of the comments you have made and the general tone of your remarks. Take care, and I will probably see you on the flip side.

 

[revmwc]

Yea, sorry, revmwc, I think I was in gloom mode for a while there. I have come to appreciate many of the comments you have made and the general tone of your remarks. Take care, and I will probably see you on the flip side.

We should never talk down or call names other than of course futurist and pretterist if we truly are brothers in Christ. We find the common ground of Faith in Chrsit and His subtitionary death for us, the Eschatology may never align but we need not fight or get heated over it all.

So again what part of Florida are you headed to?

 

[JesusFan]

JF thank you for proving my point that you use these slick references to the bible to distort what it really says to change the meaning to support your position.

It doesn’t say anything about saving the Jewish people. Let me copy and paste the actual verse
Daniel 12:1
Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

At that time
Michael the great prince
who stands watch over your people will rise up.
There will be a time of distress
such as never has occurred
since nations came into being until that time.
But at that time all your people
who are found written in the book will escape.

This is a clear and direct reference to Christians (notice name written in the book—as in lamb’s book of life) not the Jewish people. This is a clear reference to the events 66 – 70 AD.

I’d like to see you mirror the bible a little instead of trying pull fast ones over on us.

Except that the entire Book is basically a prophecy concerning the people of Daniel, the jewish peoples, as God gives us prophecy concerning empires that would in Future over Isreal Greek and Rome especially!

Why would God be talking about future all thru the Book for his people the jews and than switch to the Church?

 

[MB]

Revelation 1:7
Common English Bible (CEB)
Look, he is coming with the clouds! Every eye will see him, including those who pierced him, and all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of him. This is so. Amen.

Futurists look at this verse and believe that Christ will roll back the skies and fly down from heaven and every person will see him with their own eyes. To them it is assurance to hold on to that Christ will return in a literal, physical body to take the Saints home or rescue Jerusalem or whatever particular action is called for in a particular view of futurism.

Of course you have to suspend any logical analysis of it for that statement for it to work.

If you disagree with this view you disagree with Jesus Christ. I wonder what kind of logic applies to the Spiritual.

Every eye will see him—what about the people underground at work, riding subways, or sleeping, or those on the opposite side of the earth—obviously this view of the verse runs into problems right away.

Only to those who aply human logic to spiritual existance.

But if a literal, physical six foot (more or less) Jesus appeared in the sky even the people directly below him couldn’t see something as small as six feet long that high up.

Ever hear about television? We see the shuttles while still in outer space.

We know that this view of the verse can’t be right, right there, but wait it gets worse. Those who pierced him are the Roman soldiers at his crucifixion (or by extension those involved in his crucifixion such as the Jewish leadership) and these people are now 2,000 years old and still counting. Ouch.

Stop it your making me laugh at the idea of someone being so uninformed.

And, why is everybody (all the Jewish tribes) mourning when futurists claim the coming of the Lord is such a blessed event. If as futurists claim he comes to rescue the Jews they should be glad to see him not sad and tearful.

Think about it for a moment. You have a chance to spend eternity in heaven, and you mess it up because, you rejected the one who would give it to you if only you had believed in Him.

At every point the futurist’s view of this verse breaks down upon simple examination.

Breaks down only in the mind of someone using human logic to understand only what the Holy Spirit could give you understanding of.

Nor is there any support else where in the bible for using this interpretation of the verse.

Must the English language also be interpreted. Can't you understand simple English?

Now let’s look at the preterist’s view of this verse.

First there is support else where in the bible to guide the NT reader in how to interpret this verse based on what is found in the OT in Isaiah 19:1

An oracle concerning Egypt.
Behold, the LORD is riding on a swift cloud
and comes to Egypt;
and the idols of Egypt will tremble at his presence,
and the heart of the Egyptians will melt within them.

Here no one has ever claimed to actually see God riding on a cloud. It is understood that the Assyrian army is the manifestation of God’s will. The frequent association of God and clouds speaks to God’s presence not his literally and physically standing on clouds.

No where in scripture is God ever reffered to as physcial. God is Spirit. He can't be seen by mortal men. I'm not sure if He can be sean at all I certainly haven't seen Him. God is all powerful if He wants to ride on a cloud He can there is no reason to alegorize this passage.

This verse fits the Preterist’s view of eschatology very well. The Roman army was the manifestation of the Lord’s judgment on Israel and his coming with the clouds indicates his presence in the events unfolding in 70 AD as his wrath was poured out on Jerusalem.

The every eye will see him also fits perfectly with the Preterist’s view. While it would be impossible for every human eye to actually see Jesus for the reason’s mentioned above the Roman armies could be seen by all people in the Roman Empire which covers the territory associated with everyone. Everyone realized that the Roman armies were the manifestation of his will just as in Isaiah. They see with their mind, that is to say they understand, that the Roman armies are manifested by the Lord. Everyone understands that it is the work of the Lord unfolding in the Roman armies as they destroy Jerusalem and the Temple.

You could say those who pierced him is a reference to the Roman soldiers who actually stuck the spears in his side, but it is probably more likely a reference to those responsible for the actions at the cross—the Jewish leadership. It would be easy enough for some of them to still be alive 40 years later when Christ returns and see Roman armies march on Jerusalem. It would be foolishness to suggest they are still alive today 2,000 years and counting to see the Lord return.

And here we understand why all the Jewish tribes mourn because of him. He is not coming back to rescue them, but judge them and it is done with the crushing blows of the Roman armies.

When an honest examination of this verse is done it can’t possibly work from a futurist’s perspective—it fails on all points, but everything about it works from the Preterist’s perspective.

That's because you are unable to separate the Spiritual from the physcial.
MB

 

[Logos1]

Got a date for us MB?

MB I don’t think your post really merits any response except one part was the best laugh I’ve had all week.

Basically your whole rant was just deny, deny, deny, without any biblical support for your view, no scripture sited to support any counter position or any coherent counter argument. Just deny everything you disagree with.

I suppose in your shoes I would have been tempted to do the same thing because there is no scriptural support for it any way.

But you did have one very amusing comment. I love the one about television being the way every eye shall see Christ come back. It’s such a reach and a preposterous interpretation of Rev. 1:7 that I doubt many serious futurists would dare go there, but it’s how it contradicts some of the basic tenants of futurism that amuses me so.

So tell me brother since you all are so fond of saying that no one knows when Christ will return—how will the TV crews know when to have their cameras trained on the sky for his return? Hmmm, a bit of a futurist pickle isn’t it. Hmmm, kind of a circular contradiction of futurist’s dogma isn’t it. Hmmm, care to set a date for us MB?

 

[Logos1]

Sigh

Except that the entire Book is basically a prophecy concerning the people of Daniel, the jewish peoples, as God gives us prophecy concerning empires that would in Future over Isreal Greek and Rome especially!

Why would God be talking about future all thru the Book for his people the jews and than switch to the Church?

JF

Sometimes when I read your posts I think the primary statement they make is it that there should be a bible literacy test before you are allowed to post on the BB. Might I suggest you spend a little more time actually reading and studying the bible this weekend and less time posting.

But let me help you out a little here—seems a little Christian charity is desperately needed.

Look in the New Testament for the words of Christ on Daniel. Since you don’t like to post scriptural references to support your positions I don’t want to offend you by posting any here (but here is a hint—look in the gospels).

Christ didn’t refer to Daniel to just to hear himself talk. It’s a beautiful thing the way the weaves the prophecy of the Jews into the prophecy of Christians. Maybe a little deep for you, but it is worth the effort to study it.

When Jesus talks about the Jewish persecution of the Christians he advises when the abomination that causes desolation spoken of by Daniel appears the Christians in Judea must flea to the mountains.

Masterful work by the Master.

 

[Logos1]

maybe you would enjoy this article

Here's a quote from Answers.com:

"No one believed the Earth was flat (beyond present day "Flat Earthers"). This is a myth that has been perpetrated in education because of a mistake made by an early 20th century text book author. Many people were aware that the Earth was a sphere by the 3rd century B.C. Both Claudius Ptolemy and Marinus of Tyre (early geographers) proved that the Earth is a sphere. Working from data compiled centuries before, their calculations, while still inaccurate, where a great improvement on earlier work.

Christopher Columbus did not set out to prove that the world was round, but rather set out to find a faster trade route to Asia, discovering that the Earth was larger than anyone originally believed and discovering North America on behalf of European civilization. North America had been discovered by other populations before then, including the Vikings and of course the Jomon (ancestors of the Japanese), but Columbus' discovery was probably more relevant to modern civilization."

With God all things are possible, so a short time in God's time could be the almost 6000 years the earth has eaxisted and man has been in existence. So 1978 years is not that long of period to God. Since Jesus is God then to say shortly and mean 2000 years is a very short time. Man is the only one constrained by time, God isn't so why do you want to put Him in a box and say shortly would have to mean shortly to man? Again the verse in Peter shows God timetable, one day to the Lord is as a Thousand years and a Thousand years as one day, very simple straight forward, to God it has only been almost two days since Christ ascended that is a very short time. So quickly, or these things will come quickly is in God's time still very applicable.

In Luke jesus told the parable of the unjust steward it ends like this:

Luke 18: 6 And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith 7 And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? 8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

The same Greek word is used tachos in Luke for God avenging his elect Speedily, as the Word Quickly in Revelation 1:1 (shortly), 3:11, Revelation 22:12 and 20. So has God avenged His elect?
We are still being persecuted, the Church was persecuted by Rome until Constantine made the church part of the Roman Governemnt in the 300's A.D.
Then many who stood for the truth were persecuted for it, Tyndale and Wycliffe in the reformation era were persecuted for their faith.
Christians in Sudan and China come to mind today and yet they have yet to be avenged, but Christ said that God would Avenge quickly, Speedily and yet 1978 years and God has not avenged so was Christ lieing to them? No God will avenge His elect and he will do it speedily. Just as Christ will return for His church and then 7 years later to set up His Kingdom speedily, quickly.
Again look at Luke it says when the Son of Man cometh, cometh where, look at the next part, " shall he find faith on the earth?" This would appear He is coming to earth again, not metorphically or spiritually but physically to the Earth. That didn't happen in 70 A.D. and His elect were not avenged in 70 A.D. because the persecution continued after that. So to say He was coming quickly means speedily when He comes it will be speedily and He will avenge His elect quickly.

Revmwc I trust you won’t hold it against me if I disagree with you that the ancient Hebrews possessed advanced knowledge about our place in the cosmos. You might find this article by the
The Bulletin of the Tychonian Society #44 (July 1987) enlightening. I’ll copy one paragraph here and the conclusion.

The Babylonian universe was shaped like a modern domed stadium. The Babylonians considered the earth essentially flat, with a continental mass surrounded by ocean. The vault of the sky was a physical object resting upon the ocean's waters (and perhaps also upon pillars). Sweet (salt-free) waters below the Earth sometimes manifest themselves as springs. The Egyptian universe was also enclosed, but it was rectangular instead of round. Indeed, it was shaped much like an old-fashioned steamer trunk. (The Egyptians pictured the goddess Nut stretched across the sky as the enclosing dome.)

Conclusion
From their geographical and historical context, one would expect the ancient Hebrews to have a flat-earth cosmology. Indeed, from the very beginning, ultra-orthodox Christians have been flat-earthers, arguing that to believe otherwise is to deny the literal truth of the Bible. The flat-earth implications of the Bible were rediscovered and popularized by English-speaking Christians in the mid-19th century. Liberal scriptural scholars later derived the same view. Thus, students with remarkably disparate points of view independently concluded that the ancient Hebrews had a flat-earth cosmology, often deriving this view from scripture alone. Their conclusions were dramatically confirmed by the rediscovery of 1 Enoch.

Do you doubt that they believed that earth was at the center of the universe and the sun and stars rotated around us?

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

Your comments about God avenging quickly falls into the same category of other futurism—it makes a mockery of quickly, at hand, etc.

 

[Logos1]

Some common ground

I really don't see it as futile, maybe to us because we will never convince each other. But if we help others who are reading and not posting of the truth then it has been worth the effort.

We have found some common ground there. I can’t say I agree totally since I use to be as big a futurist as you are—but when I became convinced that the Apostles were preterists that is the day I realized I need to be one as well.

 

[Logos1]

We should never talk down or call names other than of course futurist and pretterist if we truly are brothers in Christ. We find the common ground of Faith in Chrsit and His subtitionary death for us, the Eschatology may never align but we need not fight or get heated over it all.

I think we all agree on the basic tenants of Christianity. If I ever found myself getting upset and angry over posts I’d know it was time to stop posting go do something else with my time. I don’t get mad at anyone here and don’t let anyone upset me. I know some people in here have gotten mad at me, but I have never returned the favor. I hope I’ll have the common sense to leave before I ever do. If I didn’t enjoy it I wouldn’t be here.

Actually sad that people let themselves get angry and upset over BB posts.

 

[Logos1]

In my case I will be disconnecting totally from the Internet in a day or two because we are moving. I don't know how long it will be before we get totally settled in Florida.

Tom,

I will miss you and the futurists will miss you as well. They might not admit it, but they wouldn’t be arguing with you if they didn’t enjoy it on some level. They want you back as much as I do and they will find out how much when you are gone.

I’ll be away myself tomorrow and won’t post again till Sunday at best and you will probably be gone by then so we will be looking forward to your return. I still learn things from your efforts and the BB will be a better place when you when you get back on board.

I’ll keep the futurists rascals at bay while you are gone. I wish you Godspeed, safe travels, and look forward to your return.

Take care and I’ll keep you in my prayers.

Logos1

 

[revmwc]

Do you doubt that they believed that earth was at the center of the universe and the sun and stars rotated around us?

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

Your comments about God avenging quickly falls into the same category of other futurism—it makes a mockery of quickly, at hand, etc.

I don't doubt some believed that some felt the earth was the center of the universe and the sun and stars rotated around them. I have heard or read that some actually did that doesn't mean all did. Some believe in the futurist view jhust as some believe in the preterist view, every society has beliefs that others don't.

Sorry you challenge the meaning of Greek words can you provide strongs or vines or youngs or other commonly used lexicons, dictionaries or Concordances that disagree with the one's I posted.

From youngs the greek for quickly in tachu according to young's and means speedily or quickly used in Revelation 2:5, 16, 3:11, 11:14, 22:12 and 22:20.

Again upholdoing the strongs definition. Speedily He comes for His bride and then 7 years later for to be the conquering King of Israel as prophecy states and sets up His Kingdom for 1000 years.

 

[MB]

MB I don’t think your post really merits any response except one part was the best laugh I’ve had all week.

I'm so glad you read it in spite of your poor humor anyway.

Basically your whole rant was just deny, deny, deny, without any biblical support for your view, no scripture sited to support any counter position or any coherent counter argument. Just deny everything you disagree with.

What can I say not one thing you presented from scripture actually backed up your theory. How does one disprove what hasn't been proved

I suppose in your shoes I would have been tempted to do the same thing because there is no scriptural support for it any way.

Again there is nothing in your opening post to prove your theory.

But you did have one very amusing comment. I love the one about television being the way every eye shall see Christ come back. It’s such a reach and a preposterous interpretation of Rev. 1:7 that I doubt many serious futurists would dare go there, but it’s how it contradicts some of the basic tenants of futurism that amuses me so.

Scripture does say every eye will see. Your suggestion disagrees with what God's word has said. Don't blame me. Man is the only one here that can lie or, believe a lie.

So tell me brother since you all are so fond of saying that no one knows when Christ will return—how will the TV crews know when to have their cameras trained on the sky for his return?

God's word says every eye shall see and I believe it, and you very obviously don't. So how or, why did God lie?

Hmmm, a bit of a futurist pickle isn’t it. Hmmm, kind of a circular contradiction of futurist’s dogma isn’t it. Hmmm, care to set a date for us MB?

Don't be ridiculous. No one not even the great logos knows when Christ will come.
MB