Any full preterists?

[eschatologist]

Ed Jones

You and Rays refusal to answer the points I give you(your stunned silence) shows, as in many of the futurists arguments, that when looking at things orderly and logically-- you have no answer. You spend more time looking at quotation marks rather than truth. Your argument is the same old argument that has been presented before. I am just glad that finally the scholars are starting to embrace the truth and common sense that was lost at the turn of the 20th century. As Grasshopper has said, many futurists can not answer these scriptures, optting to skip over to the less challenging verses. Or toss in the old 'dual fulfillment' theology and hope it will take. Give me a break! If you are unwitting of scripture just say so, don't just worry about quotation marks and deny the evidence.

 

[Ray Berrian]

The onus is on the Preterist is to tell us when these events happened in the past.

The Rapture, the Great Tribulation, the Second Coming of Christ, the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth, the Judgment Seat of Christ, the Marriage of the Lamb, the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, the Battle of Armageddon, [Revelation 16:16], all of the Seal, Trumpet, Vial Judgments, the fall of the apostate church [Rev. 17] the false prophet, the Battle of Gog and Magog, [Rev. 20:8] the Great White Throne Judgment {for sinners-Revelation 20:11} the New Jerusalem [21:10] the New Heaven and the New Earth [Rev. 21:1] the Antichrist of the Great Tribulation, and so on.

This is why this view of Preterism is so, so wrong and ignores all these events plus probably others. All of these events are future events and most are written about in the Book of Revelation.

Now please tell us that all of these events happened between Christ and 70 A.D. This is why I say this view is the weakest of all eschatological views.

Josephus never speaks of these events happening on our earth, nor any other historians-- soon after Christ's ascension into Heaven.

Ray Berrian, Th.D.

 

[Ed Jones]

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />They were the leadership. Christ was speaking to them, not 21st century people.

He was talking the Jewish leadership</font>[/QUOTE][Correction] He was talking to Jewish Leadership, period. This passage should not be taken in a straight literal fashion.

 

[Ed Jones]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
The onus is on the Preterist is to tell us when these events happened in the past.

I think you're right Ray. For those events, the burden of proof at this point is on the preterist position.

Ed

 

[Grasshopper]

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.

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.

Sorry, but the phrase: "shall he render unto every man according to his deeds." is the judgement.

Given the fact that much of Scripture is misunderstood, I doubt that it is God's intent to communicate all of Scripture perfectly.

Perhaps, but I disagree. I think God's intent is to communicate perfectly, it breaks down on our end.

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.

I believe they also parallel the same event.

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.

Not sure what you are saying here. If you say they did not make it through all the cities in Jerusalem before AD70, you make my point. Christ returned before they did.

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?

I see your point, however I don't think He was saying everyone would be alive to see it. It was more of a general statement. I'm sure if we looked throughout scripture we could find promises made to a group of people that some did not see the fulfillment of. The Exodus might be an example.

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

He was talking the Jewish leadership

This leads to the question, "how do we interpret scripture". I believe in "audience relevence." the first application is to whom it was written or said. The bible was written for us, not to us. Therefore when Christ was speaking to the thief on the cross, I should not take him as representative of future lost Gentiles. He was in Paradise that day with Christ.

This is fundamental to me, otherwise we could make scripture mean other than what was intended just by having this "representative" method.

Like the scoffers of his day, today's preterists are wondering what happened to the Second Coming.

Preterist don't wonder, they are the exact opposite of the scoffers.

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).

2 Thess. 17and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels,

So Paul mis-lead them because if Christ didn't return they never recieved the rest.

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.

Then what good are they to us? Completely meaningless. Yet I hear preachers, mine included, teach that we are in the "last days" and He will come soon. You will admit that anyone who says this is a fool?

Since you believe 1 day is a thousand years, then I guess you would allow for a 1 day Millinial reign. You must also allow for the possibility for the creation taking place over 1000's of years. Or do you not allow this interpretation in other areas of theology?

 

[Grasshopper]

The onus is on the Preterist is to tell us when these events happened in the past.

The Rapture, the Great Tribulation, the Second Coming of Christ, the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth, the Judgment Seat of Christ, the Marriage of the Lamb, the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, the Battle of Armageddon, [Revelation 16:16], all of the Seal, Trumpet, Vial Judgments, the fall of the apostate church [Rev. 17] the false prophet, the Battle of Gog and Magog, [Rev. 20:8] the Great White Throne Judgment {for sinners-Revelation 20:11} the New Jerusalem [21:10] the New Heaven and the New Earth [Rev. 21:1] the Antichrist of the Great Tribulation, and so on.

1. Rapture- not biblical
2. the Great Tribulation 66AD thru AD70, the Second Coming of Christ,- AD70
3. the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth,- not biblical
4. the Judgment Seat of Christ, the Marriage of the Lamb, the Marriage Supper of the Lamb,- AD70
5. the Battle of Armageddon- again, not found in scripture
6. [Revelation 16:16], all of the Seal, Trumpet, Vial Judgments, the fall of the apostate church [Rev. 17] the false prophet, the Battle of Gog and Magog, [Rev. 20:8] the Great White Throne Judgment {for sinners-Revelation 20:11} the New Jerusalem [21:10] the New Heaven and the New Earth- all in or around AD70 ( New Heaven and New Earth is the New Convenat.)
7. the Antichrist of the Great Tribulation- not biblical( too much Hal Lindsey and Tim Lahaye)

Where was the Lord crucified?

 

[Ed Jones]

Originally posted by Grasshopper:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> 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.

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.

Sorry, but the phrase: "shall he render unto every man according to his deeds." is the judgement.</font>[/QUOTE]Let me say that again. In verse 28, He is referring to coming in the glory of the Father, not the Second Coming in judgment. Verse 28 is an emphasis on Him coming in glory (from verse 27), not a statement about His Second Coming or judgment.

Not sure what you are saying here. If you say they did not make it through all the cities in Jerusalem before AD70, you make my point. Christ returned before they did.

I thought I was responding to your question. They won't make it through all the cities in the future either...

I see your point, however I don't think He was saying everyone would be alive to see it. It was more of a general statement. I'm sure if we looked throughout scripture we could find promises made to a group of people that some did not see the fulfillment of. The Exodus might be an example.

Perhaps...

This leads to the question, "how do we interpret scripture". I believe in "audience relevence." the first application is to whom it was written or said.

Well I think that is dangerous ground for a preterist to stand on. For example in the Olivet discourse, Jesus' disciples are asking for some kind of a sign to indicate His coming. If His reply includes statements like:

Mat 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Mat 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
Mat 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

What do you think His audience would have made of it?

Divine signs often came in the sky, so the first application would have been a literal interpretation. Also, previously when any of the twelve asked Him about anything, He gave them straight answers instead of parables or figures of speech (Mark 4:10-11). It was Peter, James, John and Andrew (Mark 13:3) that asked about the end of the age and the destruction of Jerusalem. He gave them literal, non symbolic answers. So a literal darkening of the sun, moon and stars and a literal sign of the Son of Man in the sky.

Are you certain that this is your position?

So Paul mis-lead them because if Christ didn't return they never recieved the rest.

Hbr 4:9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
Hbr 4:10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God [did] from his.

We enter into rest when we pass from this Earth.

Then what good are they to us? Completely meaningless. Yet I hear preachers, mine included, teach that we are in the "last days" and He will come soon. You will admit that anyone who says this is a fool?

No. The greatest danger to a Christian is not being prepared for the coming of the Lord. Christians falling away from Christ and/or accepting the mark at the end will be some of the most tragic stories ever. There are eternal consequences. If saving souls means listening to "fools" saying the end is right around the corner, then so be it. One day, one of these fools will be right...

Since you believe 1 day is a thousand years, then I guess you would allow for a 1 day Millinial reign. You must also allow for the possibility for the creation taking place over 1000's of years. Or do you not allow this interpretation in other areas of theology?

I didn't say I believed that a day is always interpreted as a thousand years. I used the quote from Peter to illustrate that God's perspective on timeliness is not like our own.

Regarding creation, I think Einstein proved this to be a dumb debate with the Theory of Relativity. If you recall, the passing of time is relative to where you are standing. There is a classic example for this. If you were to get in a spaceship and take off going at close the speed of light for a year, you could return and find everyone old. How fast they age is a function of how close to the speed of light you get.

Therefore during the creation, it is possible to have just a few days equalling thousands or even billions of years. It just depends on how fast He "stretched out the heavens" (Isa 45:12, Isa 45:5, Isa 51:13, Jer 10:12, etc)


Ed

 

[Grasshopper]

This leads to the question, "how do we interpret scripture". I believe in "audience relevence." the first application is to whom it was written or said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well I think that is dangerous ground for a preterist to stand on. For example in the Olivet discourse, Jesus' disciples are asking for some kind of a sign to indicate His coming. If His reply includes statements like:

Mat 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Mat 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
Mat 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

What do you think His audience would have made of it?

Well since His audience were 1st century Jews who were taught and read the OT daily, I think they would have immediately understood what He was saying. It was right there in their scripture:

Judgement on Egypt(530BC)
Ez.32:7 And when I shall extinguish thee, I will cover the heavens, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give its light.
8 All the bright lights of heaven will I make dark over thee, and set darkness upon thy land, saith the Lord Jehovah.

Fall of Babylon(539BC)
Is. 13: 10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light; the sun shall be darkened in its going forth, and the moon shall not cause its light to shine.

No. The greatest danger to a Christian is not being prepared for the coming of the Lord. Christians falling away from Christ and/or accepting the mark at the end will be some of the most tragic stories ever. There are eternal consequences. If saving souls means listening to "fools" saying the end is right around the corner, then so be it. One day, one of these fools will be right...

But if you believe the "last days" are just the church age and a preacher preaches a sermon on we are living in the last days, wouldn't that be an obvious statement? Since everyone from Polycarp to Martin Luther to us live in the "last days".

Or if he preaches a sermon on the Lord is coming soon, the audience will assume the meaning of "soon" to be the normal usage. Yet you state that "soon" does not have the meaning in the Bible that his audience assumes it does when he preaches the sermon.

You seem to say that He is coming "soon", but that doesn't mean He will come "soon".

I didn't say I believed that a day is always interpreted as a thousand years. I used the quote from Peter to illustrate that God's perspective on timeliness is not like our own.

I agree, but when He communicates time to mankind He uses terms they would understand. If not why use time-statements at all?

You may not interpret all passages that way, but anyone using your interpretation could biblically make the statement that the Millinnial Reign could be 1 day.

Regarding creation, I think Einstein proved this to be a dumb debate with the Theory of Relativity. If you recall, the passing of time is relative to where you are standing. There is a classic example for this. If you were to get in a spaceship and take off going at close the speed of light for a year, you could return and find everyone old. How fast they age is a function of how close to the speed of light you get.

Therefore during the creation, it is possible to have just a few days equalling thousands or even billions of years. It just depends on how fast He "stretched out the heavens" (Isa 45:12, Isa 45:5, Isa 51:13, Jer 10:12, etc)

I agree, I happen to believe thoise aren't 24 hour days.

 

[Ray Berrian]

Grasshopper,

You said, '1. Rapture- not biblical

The Rapture is Biblical: I Corinthians 15:16-23-51-58 & I Thessalonians 4:13-18. Notice in verse 16 only 'the dead in Christ' arise out of the graves, not the lost souls. These arise from the dead after the 1,000 year reign of Christ on the earth. [Rev. 20:5a]

You said, '2. the Great Tribulation 66AD thru AD70, the Second Coming of Christ,-
AD70.'

The Great Tribulation is noted in Matthew 24:21 & Rev. 7:14.'

You said, '3. the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth,- not biblical.'

Christ will reign from Jerusalem as foretold by the Prophet Micah, in 5:2. While on earth Jesus never reigned as King in Jerusalem, so His ruler-ship has to be future from now. ' . . . to be Ruler in Israel.' Also, Jesus will set His Messianic theocracy in Jerusalem as stated in Revelation 20. {the 1,000 year reign} Also, explained in Zechariah 14:1-21 especially verses 9 & 17.

You said, '4. the Judgment Seat of Christ,

'This is found in II Cor. 5:10 which is a judgment only for Christians and this happens right after Christ comes for His church/the Rapture.

You said, 'the Marriage of the Lamb, the Marriage Supper of the Lamb,- AD70.'

Ray is saying, 'Revelation 19:7. This will take place right after the Rapture and the Judgment Seat of Christ. We will formally be married to Christ in Heaven. The Marriage Supper of the Lamb, I believe, will take place in Heaven before we return to earth with Jesus at His Second Coming in judgment as found in Revelation 19:11-21.'

5. the Battle of Armageddon- again, not found in scripture.'

Ray is saying, 'Oh really! Read Revelation 16:16. Even former President Reagan used to speak of this future event called the Battle of Armageddon, and he was not even a clergyperson.'

6. [Revelation 16:16], all of the Seal, Trumpet, Vial Judgments,

Ray is saying, These future events will start after the Rapture and all heck will break lose. Read Revelation chapters six through nineteen.'

You said, 'the fall of the apostate church [Rev. 17]

After the Rapture there will be multiple thousands of people sitting in church who never were 'born again' and will be left here on earth to suffer the Great Tribulation, the Lord's judgments on this old world.'

You said, 'the false prophet,'

Ray is saying, 'The Holy Trinity is the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit. The unholy trinity during the Great Tribulation will be Satan, the antichrist, and the False prophet. In the latter part of Revelation 13 the False Prophet will preach that the antichrist is the Messiah-the Christ until the last half of the Great Tribulation when he will destroy the false ecumenical apostate church and set himself up as King of the world. Of course, Satan will be the author of all this deception.'

You said, 'the Battle of Gog and Magog, [Rev. 20:8]

You think this happened already as did all of the above but these events are all future to today. The Lord could come for His church at any second.'

You said, 'the Great White Throne Judgment {for sinners-Revelation 20:11}.

This will take place after the last sinner has sinned and after the 1,000 year reign of Christ on the earth. The gavel will fall and they will be judged as worthy of Hell.'

You said, 'the New Jerusalem [21:10]

This will be when Christ sets up His 1,000 year reign on the earth.'

You said, 'the New Heaven and the New Earth- all in or around AD70.'

This will take place after the sinner judgment as spoken of as the Great White Throne Judgment. [20:11-15]

You said, ( New Heaven and New Earth is the New Convenat.)

The New Covenant is from the death of Christ through the church age until the Rapture.'

You said, '7. the Antichrist of the Great Tribulation- not biblical( too much Hal Lindsey and Tim Lahaye).

I am saying, that the antichrist will be a future leader in our world under a one world government. In Revelation 20:10 you see the unholy trinity. The Devil/Satan, the Beast-who is the antichrist, and the false prophet, who will be cast into the Lake of Fire.' The beast/antichrist and the false prophet are deal with in Revelation 19:20.

I have never read one page of Hal Lindsey, but God's Word speaks of the events as duly noted above.'

You said, 'Where was the Lord crucified?'

I am saying, 'Just outside of Jerusalem is where the Lord was crucified. This truth is found in Revelation 11:8. I think the Gospels also deal with the place of Jesus' crucifixion. In this passage just mentioned will be the two great witnesses during the Great Tribulation who I believe will be Elijah and Enoch who will preach but will eventually be killed in the city of Jerusalem during the Great Tribulation. They will ascend into Heaven as noted in 11:12.

All of these events in this post will take place in the future.

What is the derivation of the word, Preterist or Preterism? Greek or Latin? What is the real meaning of the word?

 

[Grasshopper]

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.

Congrats, you are closer to the JW's than me. If my Preterism causes me to be lost, then I lost my salvation somewhere in the lsat 3 years. Before that I was a saved Pre-Mill Dispy.

You said, '1. Rapture- not biblical

The Rapture is Biblical: I Corinthians 15:16-23-51-58 & I Thessalonians 4:13-18. Notice in verse 16 only 'the dead in Christ' arise out of the graves, not the lost souls. These arise from the dead after the 1,000 year reign of Christ on the earth. [Rev. 20:5a]

Church history is on my side.

You said, '2. the Great Tribulation 66AD thru AD70, the Second Coming of Christ,-
AD70.'

The Great Tribulation is noted in Matthew 24:21 & Rev. 7:14.'

OK.

You said, '3. the Millennial reign of Christ on the earth,- not biblical.'

Christ will reign from Jerusalem as foretold by the Prophet Micah, in 5:2. While on earth Jesus never reigned as King in Jerusalem, so His ruler-ship has to be future from now. ' . . . to be Ruler in Israel.' Also, Jesus will set His Messianic theocracy in Jerusalem as stated in Revelation 20. {the 1,000 year reign} Also, explained in Zechariah 14:1-21 especially verses 9 & 17.

Yes, those verses sound an awful lot like the Roman destruction in the Jewish War. Might want to read Zech 14:16-22 a little closer.

5. the Battle of Armageddon- again, not found in scripture.'

Ray is saying, 'Oh really! Read Revelation 16:16. Even former President Reagan used to speak of this future event called the Battle of Armageddon, and he was not even a clergyperson.'

I do not get my theology from Ronald Reagan. Perhaps we can expound on this war later.

You said, 'the New Jerusalem [21:10]

This will be when Christ sets up His 1,000 year reign on the earth.'

Futurist I know say there will be sacrifices in the New jerusalem during the Reign. Yet verse 22 of Rev 21 says there is no temple.

You said, ( New Heaven and New Earth is the New Convenat.)

The New Covenant is from the death of Christ through the church age until the Rapture.'

1.Read Heb. 8:13.
2. The New Heavens and New Earth is a metaphore for the New Covenant. You might be suprised how many theologians understand this. Including Spurgeon.

I am saying, that the antichrist will be a future leader in our world under a one world government. In Revelation 20:10 you see the unholy trinity. The Devil/Satan, the Beast-who is the antichrist, and the false prophet, who will be cast into the Lake of Fire.' The beast/antichrist and the false prophet are deal with in Revelation 19:20.

Where does it say anywhere that the anti-christ is a person? Why do you assume the beast is the anti-christ? Perhaps the Beast is the same Beast of Dan. 7.

You said, 'Where was the Lord crucified?'

I am saying, 'Just outside of Jerusalem is where the Lord was crucified. This truth is found in Revelation 11:8.

Rev 11:8 And their dead bodies lie in the street of the great city , which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.

So Jerusalem is called the "great city".

Rev 18:10 standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Woe, woe, the great city, Babylon, the strong city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.

Babylon is also called a "great city".

Rev 18:18 and cried out as they looked upon the smoke of her burning, saying, What city is like the great city ?

The great city is being destroyed.

Rev 17:18 And the woman whom thou sawest is the great city , which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

Now the woman is called the "great city".

Revelation 17:1 And there came one of the seven angels that had the seven bowls, and spake with me, saying, Come hither, I will show thee the judgment of the great harlot that sitteth upon many waters;2 with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and they that dwell in the earth were made drunken with the wine of her fornication.3 And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness: and I saw a woman sitting upon a scarlet-colored beast , full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.

The Harlot is the woman. So the Harlot, Babylon and "the great city" are all refrences to Jerusalem. Go to the OT and find out who is refered to as a Harlot. The Jews of the 1st century knew who played the Harlot.

What is the derivation of the word, Preterist or Preterism? Greek or Latin? What is the real meaning of the word?

According to Webster's Dictionary, a Preterist is "a theologian who believes that the prophecies of the Apocalypse have already been fulfilled." In the most basic terms, a Preterist believes that all the prophecies of the Bible were fulfilled by the end of the first century AD (usually by AD 70), and those prophecies have continuing results (effects) today.

 

[Ray Berrian]

Grasshopper,

You said, 'Where does it say anywhere that the anti-christ is a person?'

Ray is saying, 'Read Revelation 13:18. ' . . . count the number of the beast, it is the number OF A MAN, and his number {notice not her number} is 666.'

It is really hard for me to believe you were formerly Pre-Millennial and did not know this. I am glad to hear from your lips that you are a saved person. I needed to hear it from you.

You fomerly asked as to where Jesus died. Hebrews 13:10-13 strongly hints that it was Jerusalem.

Regards,
Ray

 

[eschatologist]

Reveation 13:18 does not say 'antichrist'. John in his epistles mention 'antichrist' term only three times, and in each of these examples it is used collectively, not as an individual. It was referring to an event where many would fall away and deny Jesus Christ is from the Father. This misunderstanding that the 'antichrist' is a individual is a weed propagated from this pre-mil deception. If one would just read John's words and LISTEN to what he says, rather than believe mans fairy tales, they could then see the truthful understanding.

 

[Grasshopper]

Reveation 13:18 does not say 'antichrist'. John in his epistles mention 'antichrist' term only three times, and in each of these examples it is used collectively, not as an individual. It was referring to an event where many would fall away and deny Jesus Christ is from the Father. This misunderstanding that the 'antichrist' is a individual is a weed propagated from this pre-mil deception. If one would just read John's words and LISTEN to what he says, rather than believe mans fairy tales, they could then see the truthful understanding.

I think that went right over his head. His presupposition that the Beast is the antichrist is so strong he didn't even comprehend what I said.

 

[Grasshopper]

You fomerly asked as to where Jesus died. Hebrews 13:10-13 strongly hints that it was Jerusalem.

Good, then you would agree with this statement:
The Harlot, Babylon and "the great city" are all refrences to Jerusalem.

 

[eschatologist]

The number of the beast from Revelation 13 is not 6-6-6. It is a number that totals six hundred and sixty-six. In ancient times people used a coded system called 'gemetria'. It was a system that used the letters of the alphabet to also represent numbers. The ancient Hebrew writing for Nero Caesar was Nrwn Qsr. It is broken down in its coded form as follows:

N - 50
R - 200
W - 6
N - 50

Q - 100
S - 60
R - 200
--------
Total- 666

This was the beast of Revelation. It was no coincidence that this number equals Nero Caesar. In the Latin bible translated by Jerome the number totaled in Revelation 13 was 616. This was because in the Latin the letter 'N' was dropped off of 'NRWN' to be 'NRW'. This is the way Nero was translated into Latin. Another coincidence? You Pre-Mil's need to stop trying to keep inventing and sculpting the meaning of Revelation to fit your terms! History and symbolic meanings from the Old Testament should dictate how we interpret the bible.

 

[Ray Berrian]

Sorry, 'the number of a man' is not a collective term; it is a single concept. The real antichrist will be the most powerful person who will have ever lived, and he is yet to come into prominence. [Revelation 13:18] The antichrist is not a system so much as individuals because the Apostle John says, in effect that the spirit of antichrist has gone out into the world and is personified in the most evil of persons, humanly speaking. [I John 4:3]
Nero was one of these men for example.

 

[eschatologist]

Sorry, you have not correctly read your bible. Please read 1John 2:18; 4:3; 2John 2:7. Here we see wording such as "many", "every" and "any". How you can openly deny what the apostle John has said is beyond me. We can go back and forth like volleys in a tennis match on this issue, but you can only score if you keep it inbounds. Your every attempt at re-inventing the meaning of the Word of God has continued to go off course. Game, set, and match for those who obey the Word of God!

 

[Eric B]

Take a dualist position, and all of this stuff will be covered. AD70, like the preterist position, the middle ages tot he present, like the historicist position of the SDA's, all with a yet future antetypical fulfillment. So 666 was Nero, the historical Roman Empire (He Latine Basilea, which also adds up to the #), and the future revived Roman Empire.

But to say all of that is only in AD70, and we are now in the "New Heavens and New Earth? That would mean, according to Rev.20, that there is no more sin, evil, and death. We are already in our glorified bodies, right?
If this life is all we have hope for, we are the most pitiable of men!

Good, then you would agree with this statement:
The Harlot, Babylon and "the great city" are all refrences to Jerusalem.

While Israel was called Babylon in Isaiah, I don't think it matches with what we have seen in history. "Costly pearls, adornments, fine linens", etc? Rides (controls) the kings of the earth? I don't think so, not now, and especially not in AD70! But if you look at the church as the new Jerusalem, then it should be easy to see where a corrupted form of it could fulfill the "Babylon" of prophecy, and this church did have all of that glamor, wealth and power the passage describes.

 

[eschatologist]

Quick thoughts:

Revelation 20:4 does NOT say their will be no more "sin, evil, and death." It says "There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the older order of things has passed away"(Rev.20:4). There is a big difference in this than from sin, evil, and death. For sin has only ended in that their is atonement now for it through Christ. The former has passed away, which was the "first heaven and the first earth." What was replacing them were the "new heaven and the new earth." Also referred to as "the Holy City, the new Jerusalem" which was called the "bride beautifully dressed for her husband" as well. And then it was called "dwelling of God." This was definitely symbolism of the new covenant church(Heb.12:22-24). What it was saying here by the former things passing away was that the churches persecutions that Paul and others described that they would to go through has ended, and the separation(death) through sin that had begun with the 'first Adam' had now come to an end, as a result of the atonement realized through Christ(Dan.9:24), the 'second Adam'. There was no more need to mourn or cry. Sin had now been paid for by the shed blood of Christ. He had risen from the dead and proceeded to present Himself before the Father in the Holy of Holies. This was in accordance typified by the Jewish priestly system. Once accepted by the Father He came back(like the priest returning from the Temple Holy of Holies) as He said He would (Jo.14:1f; Matt.10:23;16:28;24:30;26:64;Heb.10:37;Rev.1:7). Terms as 'earth' and 'heavens' ending was not used here to represent the 'terra firma'. I was just as it was used commonly throughout the Old Testament. It symbolised the ending of a nation and its leadership and covenant system. This is how it is explain in those Old Testament books. Why do so many have a hard time accepting what the Lord has outlined for us? Are we justified in re-defining His meaning? I think not! So let us have faith and believe in the Lord, for His word is truth.

 

[Eric B]

All of what you describe is but a foreshadowing of the true "New Heavens and New Earth", as the dualist position would allow. 20:4 is not even the most pertinent verse on this. You have to take the rest of the scriptures (including in the Gospels and Epistles), and then it is clear that this is ultimately talking about universal conditions, not just the spiritual state of being saved.

Revelation 20:4 does NOT say their will be no more "sin, evil, and death." It says "There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the older order of things has passed away"(Rev.20:4). There is a big difference in this than from sin, evil, and death. For sin has only ended in that their is atonement now for it through Christ.

Are we in our new bodies that do not die yet, as Corinthians talks about?

Are any of us kings or judges as v.4 says?

Is there "in no wise entering, anything that defiles, works abomination, makes a lie"? (21:27) I know you can interpret that as "whoever does those things is not a real Christian", but nevertheless, they are still IN the Church.

Once again, if only for THIS LIFE have we hope, we are above all the most to be pitied. (1 Cor.15:19)

What it was saying here by the former things passing away was that the churches persecutions that Paul and others described that they would to go through has ended

So when the church was accepted by the emperor and persecution ceased, then that was "the New Heaven and the New Earth". Even as the church herself would later persecute others. I guess that was the "judgment" we see committed to them, and the judgment of unbelievers we see there also? (then why has this ceased, and the RCC pretends to be friendly to everyone?) But then that end of persecution was 3 centuries later, not in AD70. Some of the worst persecution was still yet to occur after that.

the separation(death) through sin that had begun with the 'first Adam' had now come to an end, as a result of the atonement realized through Christ(Dan.9:24), the 'second Adam'. There was no more need to mourn or cry. Sin had now been paid for by the shed blood of Christ. He had risen from the dead and proceeded to present Himself before the Father in the Holy of Holies.

Where does it say that "mourning" or "crying" was particularly in reference to the separation from God. Most people in the world do not even realize that they are so separated, or fiercely reject it. Most want to live their lives without God anyway, so who's crying? Mourning and crying is more associated with the suffering of the world and physical death, both of which still exist in your New Heaven.

Why do so many have a hard time accepting what the Lord has outlined for us? Are we justified in re-defining His meaning? I think not! So let us have faith and believe in the Lord, for His word is truth.

We're not the ones redefining it. We're the ones taking these things for what the words actually say, and you're the one putting all sorts of weird allegorical interpretations on them.