Any full preterists?

[Grasshopper]

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;

Revelation 1 tell us when(shortly) these things would happen and how(signified) to interpret the book. It is full of symbolism and signs. Most of which are found in the OT.

Eschatologist,

There is no historical mark of the beast either literally or allegorically. No one has ever required a mark on their hand or forehead to buy or sell anything.

Let the OT guide you to interpret the NT.

Marks signify ownership. It is clearly symbolic just like it was in the OT.

Dt. 6:8 And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thy hand, and they shall be for frontlets between thine eyes.

Dt. 11:18 Therefore shall ye lay up these my words in your heart and in your soul; and ye shall bind them for a sign upon your hand, and they shall be for frontlets between your eyes.

Ex 9:4 And Jehovah said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry over all the abominations that are done in the midst thereof.

I have found over the past 2 years that Full- Preterism is the most biblically sound view. Though I don't pretend to have all the answers.

 

[eschatologist]

Ed Jones

I guess this will be the end of my correspondance with you on this topic. I have repeatedly offered scripture to just what the word says, yet apparently you see no need to read it. If everything had been accomplished at the cross then the Hebrew writer has giving us some false information(Heb.9:8). The whole book of Hebrews would really give you some insight to what I said, if you would just read it. It explains then need and the SOON changinging of the covenants, and tells you that in order for second to come into force, the first needed to be removed. Apparently you need to rip the book of Hebrews from your bible since you do not agree with ALL that it says anyway. Believe me, I am very sorry to be so harsh and critical. You want to cling onto a few issues and passages, but do not want to see the New Testament as a whole. I am still very interested in seeing what your outcome on you studying the word 'generation' or the phrase 'this generation' will be. And then when it comes to time statement in the bible, it makes me wonder if you Futurists believe God knows how to tell time, due to the bending, twisting and stretching of time that is done by adherents to your view.

 

[eschatologist]

Ed Jones

You are apparently not too familar with the New Testament Greek. It is far more articulate than English. Your example of the girl being cold is non-sense in the Greek. For example, If I wrote to you that I love you, it would be easy to identify which love that would be. In the Greek there are at least four words to define what kind of love I was implying. This is not the case with English. So it is also with generation. This generation(aute genea) means exactly as it was said and implied by the Lord. And in Matthew 16:28 when He said some standing there would not taste death before the Son of Man comes, He meant it.

 

[Ed Jones]

Originally posted by eschatologist:
I guess this will be the end of my correspondance with you on this topic.

Do you mean it are you just bluffing? Or is it just feigned exasperation?

Look, it is obvious at this point that your defense of the preterist position has failed. Why don't we just call it a day?

Ed

 

[Ed Jones]

Grasshopper,

"Shortly" is a relative term. Here are a few OT examples:

Jos 23:16 When ye have transgressed the covenant of the LORD your God, which he commanded you, and have gone and served other gods, and bowed yourselves to them; then shall the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and ye shall perish quickly from off the good land which he hath given unto you.
500+ years before fulfillment

Hag 2:6 For thus saith the LORD of hosts; Yet once, it is a little while, and I will shake the heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land;
Hag 2:7 And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, saith the LORD of hosts.
500+ years before Jesus came (although pre-mills will say this hasn’t happened yet)

Psa 37:9 For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth.
Psa 37:10 For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be.
Almost 3,000 years and counting. The wicked are still on the earth.

As mentioned already, the mark of the beast must be forced on everyone in their forehead or right hand by the false prophet otherwise people will not be able to buy or sell. I don't think these OT references come together to fit this description.

I have found over the past 2 years that Full- Preterism is the most biblically sound view. Though I don't pretend to have all the answers.

I appreciate your honesty. We are all seeking the truth. However all the answers that we think we have must line up with Scripture. I don't think the preterist position can make that claim.

Ed

 

[eschatologist]

Haggai 2:1f was NOT about Jesus coming and a new covenant, it was about re-building the Temple that had been destroyed by the Babylonians and God coming back into it with His Glory Cloud. See this is where many pre-mils go wrong. They fail to see an historical event that was accomplished "in a little while" and inject its meaning centuries ahead of the actual fulfillment. This was fulfilled by the re-building of the Temple and Jerusalem. Sorry!!!

As for Psalms 37:1f, I will examine this further. It appears to me just a homily about the righteous overcoming wicked men at any time and for all time. Read Psalms 73:1f, for it is very similar, and probably mean the same thing.

 

[Ray Berrian]

Those who claim that the resurrection is in the past and so on are wrong, including the feeble idea that the Antichrist has already lived and died. I would not doubt that the 'spirit of antichrist' has been in this world since the time of the Apostle John. In fact Scripture says this. [I John 4:3]

Church history has portrayed the most terrible of times of hatred and death, but the Antichrist is yet to come and declare himself ruler over the whole world. Church history never documented a man who required the mark on the right hand or on the forehead. [Revelation 13:16] Neither has this one forbidden any to 'buy or sell' unless they have this dreaded mark. [vs. 17] I say, dreaded, because any who receive this mark Christ says will be damned for all eternity. Those who refuse the mark will lose their life by being beheaded. [Revelation 20:4] These faithful souls who die during the future Great Tribulation will die rather than betray their faith in Jesus, and their reward is documented in Revelation 7:9-14. At their death they will appear in the Presence of Christ above. They will not just come from Israel; the Preterists theory is the most frail of all eschatological views. The Bible says they will lose their lives in all nations. [vs. 9] Through martyrdom they will by themselves wash their robes in the blood of the Lamb of God, our Savior. [vs. 14]

The Great Tribulation [Matt. 24:21 & Rev. 7:14] plus a list of many other events have still not happened. The next God ordained event will be the taking of the church into Heaven as noted in I Thessalonians 4:14-18 which theolgians call the rapture of the church. Notice only the 'dead in Christ' (the saved) will rise from the dead and be translated into Heaven. [vs. 16d]

The main large events will be the rapture, the Great Tribulation, the Millennium, Great White Throne Judgment, the New Heaven and the New earth.

 

[Grasshopper]

Jos 23:16 When ye have transgressed the covenant of the LORD your God, which he commanded you, and have gone and served other gods, and bowed yourselves to them; then shall the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and ye shall perish quickly from off the good land which he hath given unto you.
500+ years before fulfillment

This seems to say that they will die a quick death, not that they will be transressing the covenant soon.

Hag 2:6 For thus saith the LORD of hosts; Yet once, it is a little while, and I will shake the heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land;
Hag 2:7 And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, saith the LORD of hosts.
500+ years before Jesus came (although pre-mills will say this hasn’t happened yet)

Within only four years ("in a little while") after the prophecy in Hag. 2:6-9; 21-23 was given, God overthrew all the nations, (i.e., He "shook the heavens, the earth, the sea and the dry land") and the desire (or wealth) of all nations came, and the temple was filled with glory (with gold, silver, etc.) (Compare Haggai 1:15; 2:10 and Ezra 6:15)

This all took place when Darius King of Persia overturned Israel's enemies, who for years had been preventing the rebuilding of God's house. Darius decreed, "May God ...overthrow any king or people who lifts a hand to change this decree or to destroy this temple in Jerusalem." (Ezra 6:11-12) Darius forced Israel's enemies themselves to pay the full cost of the rebuilding, as well as the full cost of all the daily, priestly services. (Ezra 6:8-10)

The power of Israel's enemies was broken. They had tried to turn the king against Israel, (Ezra 5) but God turned their own stratagems against them. He made them subservient to His people, taking their own wealth for the building of His glorious house. God had thus "moved heaven and earth" to keep the covenant that He had made with His people through Moses. (Ezra 6:18; Hag. 2:5)

Futurist want to render time statements by God meaningless. Consider:

Ez 7:7 Thy doom is come unto thee, O inhabitant of the land: the time is come, the day is near , a day of tumult, and not of joyful shouting, upon the mountains.

God says the day is near. What did the futurist of the day say?

Ez 11:2 And he said unto me, Son of man, these are the men that devise iniquity, and that give wicked counsel in this city;3 that say, The time is not near to build houses: this city is the caldron, and we are the flesh.4 Therefore prophesy against them, prophesy, O son of man.

They probably believed that God's time was not mans time.

However? What was God's time?

Ez 12:21 And the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying,22 Son of man, what is this proverb that ye have in the land of Israel, saying, The days are prolonged, and every vision faileth?23 Tell them therefore, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: I will make this proverb to cease, and they shall no more use it as a proverb in Israel; but say unto them, The days are at hand , and the fulfilment of every vision.24 For there shall be no more any false vision nor flattering divination within the house of Israel.25 For I am Jehovah; I will speak, and the word that I shall speak shall be performed; it shall be no more deferred: for in your days, O rebellious house, will I speak the word, and will perform it, saith the Lord Jehovah .26 Again the word of Jehovah came to me, saying,27 Son of man, behold, they of the house of Israel say, The vision that he seeth is for many day to come, and he prophesieth of times that are far off.28 Therefore say unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: There shall none of my words be deferred any more, but the word which I shall speak shall be performed, saith the Lord Jehovah.

Now, time for some futurist to deal with scripture.

Notice what Jesus tells the Pharasies:
Matt 23:33 Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment of hell?34 Therefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: some of them shall ye kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city:

Jesus told His disciples the same thing, with one exception:

Matt 10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee into the next: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone through the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come

So did the son of man come before they went through the cities of Israel?

Matt 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then shall he render unto every man according to his deeds.28 Verily I say unto you, there are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

When did this happen? Before you put it at the Mount of Transfiguration read verse 27 carefully. It speaks of His Coming and Judgement, and you can't have a Judgement without the Resurrection.

So do you wish to still put those events at the Mount of Transfiguration?

Matt 26:64 Jesus said unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.

Jesus was speaking to Caiaphus, scribes and elders. So did they see Him coming on the clouds?

It is nice when the Preterist can ask questions.

 

[Turbeville]

Its very simple...anyone that believes in this does not read the same Holy Bible that I read and it is a terrible mistake to take out only what you want to believe..that is how cults get started.

 

[eschatologist]

Turbeville

It is very clear, you read the bible the way that you want to read it. Grasshopper has presented you with CLEAR fulfilled history, and what really hurts when I hear a comment like yours is, the Bible itself validates the meanings presented by Grasshopper and myself. You choose to accept your own understanding rather than believe what Haggai, Jeremiah, Zephaniah and Ezekiel have told you what their prophesies were about. God help you my friend!

I will comment on Rays rediculous comment later.

 

[Ray Berrian]

Turbville,

You are more than correct. At least the J.W.'s believe in a literal Kingdom on the earth in the future. These guys sound like cultists and I even wonder if they are saved. I hope they are but who knows, but Jesus. I haven't heard anything near orthodoxy yet out of their mouths and hearts. Let's look for something positive and Biblical from them in the future posts.

 

[Ed Jones]

Originally posted by Grasshopper:
It is nice when the Preterist can ask questions.

Actually I enjoy answering questions, with prayer and study it always brings me closer to the truth.

Jos 23:16... 500+ years before fulfillment
This seems to say that they will die a quick death, not that they will be transressing the covenant soon.

When God overthrew Israel and Judah, there were many sieges lasting months and years. Many people died from diseases or slowly starved to death (leading people to eat just about anything to survive). These were not quick deaths.

Hag 2:6... 500+ years before Jesus came
Within only four years ("in a little while") after the prophecy in Hag. 2:6-9; 21-23 was given, God overthrew all the nations, (i.e., He "shook the heavens, the earth, the sea and the dry land") and the desire (or wealth) of all nations came, and the temple was filled with glory (with gold, silver, etc.) (Compare Haggai 1:15; 2:10 and Ezra 6:15)

If the glory represented the gold and silver, would it then be accurate to say that the glory of the second temple will exceed the first temple? (Hag 2:9) When considering the wealth of the Kings of Israel/Judah, this seems highly unlikely.

Ps 37: No answer...
The mark of the beast: Still no answer...


Now concerning Matt 10:23, please compare these two passages:

Mat 10:16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
Mat 10:17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;
Mat 10:18 And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.
Mat 10:19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
Mat 10:20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.
Mat 10:21 And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against [their] parents, and cause them to be put to death.
Mat 10:22 And ye shall be hated of all [men] for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.
Mat 10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

Mar 13:8 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these [are] the beginnings of sorrows.
Mar 13:9 But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.
Mar 13:10 And the gospel must first be published among all nations.
Mar 13:11 But when they shall lead [you], and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.
Mar 13:12 Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against [their] parents, and shall cause them to be put to death.
Mar 13:13 And ye shall be hated of all [men] for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

There is a dual fulfillment here. He is not only speaking to the disciples of His day, but also the disciples of the future. Note the definitive parallels between Matt 10 & Mark 13. Words in several verses match verbatim. From a futurist view, there is no conflict here.


Concerning Matt 16:27-28:
Matt 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then shall he render unto every man according to his deeds.28 Verily I say unto you, there are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

I see verse 28 is a statement about the Son of man coming in the glory of His Father (which was fulfilled on the Mount of Transfiguration). That's what He means by seeing Him coming in his kingdom. There is no mention of judgment in verse 28.

Perhaps you should also consider these verses:
Jhn 21:20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?
Jhn 21:21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what [shall] this man [do]?
Jhn 21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what [is that] to thee? follow thou me.
Jhn 21:23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die...

Maybe John is still around?!? There are traditions that say that he did not die. I think we have another candidate for the two witnesses

Matt 26:64 Jesus said unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.

Jesus was speaking to Caiaphus, scribes and elders. So did they see Him coming on the clouds?

I would think that even the preterist position would have trouble with a literal interpretation of this verse. These people were obviously not around in 70AD. They would have died or put to death when the zealots took control of Jerusalem. Caiaphus most certainly would have died since he reigned as high priest between 18-36AD(?).

If Jesus made this statement to all of them, then there must a figurative meaning unless even the dead will see him coming on the clouds. He didn't qualify the statement by saying some of you (like in Matt 16:28 above), He spoke to all present. So if any were not present, then a straight literal interpretation cannot apply. More likely it was a statement to the leadership of Israel with a future fulfillment, which is still consistent with the futurist view.


BTW, one of the things that I have observed about the preterist position is a very narrow focus on just those passages that support a first century coming of Christ. Think about these verses:

Mar 13:32 But of that day and [that] hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
Mar 13:33 Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.

No one in the first century knew when Jesus was due to return. Not the disciples, not the Apostles, nor Jesus Himself! Jesus knew the events leading of up His return, but not when. He knew that it wasn't going to be immediately (Verse 34) but again not the timing. So much of the language written concern the second coming was written with words like "quickly", "at hand", "last days", etc. It was not because it had to happen in the first century. It was because they just didn't know and wanted people to continue to watch.

I believe too much is made of passages that indicate an immediate return of Jesus. I'm sure that no one in that day would have ever guessed it would be this long...


Ed

 

[Ray Berrian]

Do full Preterists believe that the Second Coming and the final judgment of sinners is already in the distant past?

 

[eschatologist]

Ed Jones

The more we debate the more grasping at straws you do!

From WHAT do you base a dual fulfillment of anything in Matthew 10 or Mark 13??? From your logic or from someone else have you staked your faith in??? This is ABSOLUTELY rediculous, and is the method always used when there is something that can not be interpreted singularly to fit within a limited doctrine or theology!!! Show me in the BIBLE where you get such an interpretation . What you make Jesus out to be is someone who was totally ambiguous about most everything He said, and He would have to have left everyone He spoke to scratching their heads! Can we not just go ahead and make any and everything we want to in the bible a dual fulfillment? Why not a tri or quad fulfillment then??? Heck, the skies the limit!!!

Equally absurd is your interpretation of the Matthew 16:27, 28 verses! This transfiguration logic makes Jesus look like His understanding is somewhere out in left field. Even as you said that Jesus did not know the actual DAY, MONTH, or YEAR of His return is correct, He did have enough understanding to know what signs preceded this event and to what and by what brought it to fulfillment. And yes He did know it was to happen within a generation(Matt.24:34). He believed it to be so(i.e., "I tell you the truth"). I am so sorry that you do not want to believe in Him! And with your transfiguration interpretation I ask you this:

1) Do you think that Jesus would make such a statement as, "I tell you the truth, some standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom" only to be fulfilled six days later??? I bet He was expecting many of them to drop dead in six days!!!

2) Do you think that Moses and Elijah qualify as angels? Because He did say, "For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels..." I do not believe His disciples thought they were angels.

3)If you believe this coming happened with the transfiguration, then you would have to believe we are now in the kingdom, for Jesus said the coming of the kingdom was one of the events associated with His coming!

4)How you disassociate Matthew 16:27 from Matthew 16:28 is beyond me!!! This is one of the great examples of side-stepping, scripture twisting, hermenuetic neglecting ploys that I mentioned in an earlier post. If you think verse 27 mentions no judgment, then what is the meaning of "then he will reward each person according to what he has done?" Was "each person" pertaining only to the disciples present at the transfiguration? What did Jesus reward them with, a pat on the back or maybe a few coins??? How rediculous!!!

On your sarcasm regarding John 21:20f where you said, "Maybe John is still around?!?" That is exactly what I say if John 21:20f has not been fulfilled yet!!! Or maybe Jesus was lost as to what was going on, like you have made Him out to be from your prior statements. Oh, also there are traditions that claim that Jesus married Mary Magdalene. But let me guess, you also believe all of those writings as well?

On your logic about Matthew 26:64, you show me that you are definitely on the curve, the curve staying further away from biblical reason!!! You said, "So did they see Him coming on the clouds?" My goodness man, do you believe Jesus lied to them or what? He said it Himself that they would witness it!!! Oh!!! You said, "Most LIKELY it was a statement to the leadership of Israel with a FUTURE FULFILLMENT, which is CONSISTANT with the FUTURIST view." Are you trying to put words into Jesus' mouth, or re-define what He was saying? I will say this, you futurists are, as you have said, consistant. Consistantly grasping at air with some of the reasoning presented here! Why not just take our Lord at what He said, rather that using terms like "more likey", "probably","maybe", or "possibly"?

And finally, you acknowledge He knew a little something about timing by saying, "He knew it wasn't going to be immediately(Verse34) but again not the timing." You are right, a generation does not necessarily mean immediately, but still it does mean within a generation. But then you claim, "So much of the language written concerning the second coming was written with words like "quickly", "at hand", "last days", etc. It was not written because it had to happen in the first century. It was because they just didn't know and want people to continue to watch." Man, are you kidding me??? Are we to only apply this formula to time specific words only when they are eschatological? Then they mean what they mean on any other occassion? Heck you need to go ahead and re-write the bible!!! Jesus said, I repeat JESUS SAID, "When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemtion is drawing near"(Lu.21:28; see also Lu.18:7). So you say Jesus did not want people to "continue to watch"? And Paul repeated to the church over and over again to keep watching. You have once again missed the mark and are fallacious. You are swatting at at gnats with a hula hoop!!! Rather than taking Jesus at His word, you have chosen to believe in the erred logic of man. This is not sound reasoning that someone uses to find truth. Jesus says, "I am the truth, the way, and the life." Following and obeying His truth is the way to salvation. You may not get there by assumption! Go with God not man.

 

[Ed Jones]

Ray,

I believe that they do. The Second Coming was in 70AD and all of the dead have been judged. If someone dies now, they either go to Heaven or straight to the lake of fire.

It really is an amazing Escatalogical position...

Ed

 

[Ed Jones]

Eschatologist,

What's with the question marks????????? And you use of exclamation points are annoying!!!!!!

If you want to ask reasonable questions without the dramatics, that's fine. Otherwise, you can talk to yourself!!!!!

Ed

 

[Ed Jones]

For those of you watching at home, here is what Eschatologist is attempting to do. It's called arguing using Hyperbole. Click here for a link to a page with a basic description.

Now back to our program...

Ed

 

[Grasshopper]

I see verse 28 is a statement about the Son of man coming in the glory of His Father (which was fulfilled on the Mount of Transfiguration). That's what He means by seeing Him coming in his kingdom. There is no mention of judgment in verse 28.

Perhaps you need to read my statement again.

When did this happen? Before you put it at the Mount of Transfiguration read verse 27 carefully. It speaks of His Coming and Judgement, and you can't have a Judgement without the Resurrection.

I cannot find a futurist who will deal with verse 27. They just ignore it and go to 28. Why would just "some" still be alive at an event that happens 6 days later?

Ps 37: No answer...

This verse I have not studied, so I just say " I don't know". However, I do believe that God communicates with man in terms he understands. So the time-statements mean what they say they mean, though my understanding may be limited, His Word is true.

The mark of the beast: Still no answer...

Again, I believe it to be symbolic just like the other "marks" in the Old and New Testaments. There really is no more to say, though I could, since I take it symbolically and you take it literally.

Mat 10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

There is a dual fulfillment here. He is not only speaking to the disciples of His day, but also the disciples of the future.

This is an interpretation used by futurist only when things don't fit their system of eschatology. Partial Prets along with many dispys acknowledge that the Olivet Discourse is describing the destruction of Jerusalem, yet say it has a "dual" meaning/double fulfillment. Which prophecies have dual meanings and which don't? Are we to believe the OT and NT prophecies point to types and not reality?

Note the definitive parallels between Matt 10 & Mark 13. Words in several verses match verbatim. From a futurist view, there is no conflict here.

But did they see the son of man come before they went through the cities of Jerusalem?

Jhn 21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what [is that] to thee? follow thou me.
Jhn 21:23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die...

Maybe John is still around?!? There are traditions that say that he did not die. I think we have another candidate for the two witnesses

Or perhaps John lived to see the Parousia.

I would think that even the preterist position would have trouble with a literal interpretation of this verse. These people were obviously not around in 70AD. They would have died or put to death when the zealots took control of Jerusalem. Caiaphus most certainly would have died since he reigned as high priest between 18-36AD(?).

Who says they were dead before AD70? If they were indeed killed during the 3 and a half year siege then they did in fact see His coming/parousia, because that was it.

More likely it was a statement to the leadership of Israel with a future fulfillment,

They were the leadership. Christ was speaking to them, not 21st century people.

BTW, one of the things that I have observed about the preterist position is a very narrow focus on just those passages that support a first century coming of Christ.

Good, I'm glad to see you acknowledge that passages do support a 1st century coming. I would disagree that they are few. The NT is full of imminent time-statements.
How many times must Jesus say something to make it true? Isn't once sufficient?

No one in the first century knew when Jesus was due to return. Not the disciples, not the Apostles, nor Jesus Himself! Jesus knew the events leading of up His return, but not when. He knew that it wasn't going to be immediately (Verse 34) but again not the timing. So much of the language written concern the second coming was written with words like "quickly", "at hand", "last days", etc. It was not because it had to happen in the first century. It was because they just didn't know and wanted people to continue to watch.

So we should just ignore those time terms, it just God's way of keeping us on our toes? When the apostle Paul offered hope to the Thessolonians, it was a false hope they would never see.

I believe too much is made of passages that indicate an immediate return of Jesus.

I don't know what to say in regards to that statement. Other than when the writers wrote the NT, they must not have been inspired when they indicated these things were soon to happen.

 

[Grasshopper]

Ray,

I believe that they do. The Second Coming was in 70AD and all of the dead have been judged. If someone dies now, they either go to Heaven or straight to the lake of fire.

It really is an amazing Escatalogical position...

Ed

Amazing? So you tell friends that their dead loved ones in Christ are NOT in Heaven? That is amazing.

 

[Ed Jones]

Originally posted by Grasshopper:

I cannot find a futurist who will deal with verse 27. They just ignore it and go to 28. Why would just "some" still be alive at an event that happens 6 days later?

I dealt with verse 27. It just isn't linked to verse 28 in the way you think it is. He is referring to coming in the glory of the Father, not the Second Coming in judgment.

Ps 37: No answer...
This verse I have not studied, so I just say " I don't know". However, I do believe that God communicates with man in terms he understands. So the time-statements mean what they say they mean, though my understanding may be limited, His Word is true.

Given the fact that much of Scripture is misunderstood, I doubt that it is God's intent to communicate all of Scripture perfectly. Unless we have ears to hear, we will always be in error.

The mark of the beast: Still no answer...
Again, I believe it to be symbolic just like the other "marks" in the Old and New Testaments. There really is no more to say, though I could, since I take it symbolically and you take it literally.

There's more to it than that. Even the symbolic must have meaning. There's a old saying that says "Hindsight is 20/20". If the preterist says that the mark has occurred, then he should be able to identify it. Whether literal or symbolic.

This is an interpretation used by futurist only when things don't fit their system of eschatology. Partial Prets along with many dispys acknowledge that the Olivet Discourse is describing the destruction of Jerusalem, yet say it has a "dual" meaning/double fulfillment. Which prophecies have dual meanings and which don't? Are we to believe the OT and NT prophecies point to types and not reality?

I don't believe that this is a fair assessment. The verses from both passages do line up. The wording is exactly the same. This isn't a case of simple waving a magic wand to make something fit. The passages are truly parallel. And if they are, the case is sound for a dual fulfillment.

But did they see the son of man come before they went through the cities of Jerusalem?

No. In the first century, there is no evidence that they made it through all the cities of Israel.

Or perhaps John lived to see the Parousia.

Or perhaps he will....

Who says they were dead before AD70? If they were indeed killed during the 3 and a half year siege then they did in fact see His coming/parousia, because that was it.

Who says that they weren't? Are you saying that all the ELDERS of Israel who were present at Jesus' trial lived and additional 35+ years?

They were the leadership. Christ was speaking to them, not 21st century people.

He was talking the Jewish leadership

Good, I'm glad to see you acknowledge that passages do support a 1st century coming. I would disagree that they are few. The NT is full of imminent time-statements.

Imminent time-statements are very subjective. You know what Peter said about the coming of the Lord when He hadn't appeared in 30+ years:

2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
2Pe 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as [they were] from the beginning of the creation.
2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Like the scoffers of his day, today's preterists are wondering what happened to the Second Coming. Their conclusion, it must have already past.

So we should just ignore those time terms, it just God's way of keeping us on our toes? When the apostle Paul offered hope to the Thessolonians, it was a false hope they would never see.

The Thessolonians were already worried about people dying before the second coming. Paul reassured them that the dead would be first to rise (1 Th 4:13-16).

I don't know what to say in regards to that statement. Other than when the writers wrote the NT, they must not have been inspired when they indicated these things were soon to happen.

Just like the OT references that I gave already, "soon" is a relative word. From God's perspective, hundreds or thousands of years may pass before fulfillment.


Ed