Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
No; the Church continued to wait for a literal return of Christ. They did not see it in AD70, and I don't see teaching in the early church that said it was. It was a few centuries later, when persecution stopped, and the Church became accepted in the Empire, that people began feeling "Wow! The Kingdom of God is here!" But this was only the beginning of the "Dark Ages".
That does not say "forever". "Ages" there is "genea", meaning generations. That's the Church for all generations, not all eternity. Now you're talking about our hermeneutics, but when you take a verse like that, you have to make sure the words are really saying what you think they are.
That's for now; the time being. The rapture is for when God finally judges the world. There are different timings of it, and my view has it later than the popular view, where we are taken before anything bad happens. Still, in this present age, we are in the world, not taken out of it. When this world is judged, God will take us out of it, because it will be over. You don't believe that. You believe this world of sin will go on forever, and the only way out of it is death into an unrevealed eternity.
Only in your hyperspiritualized, one dimensional tunnel vision view. It was one event, in a whole series of events in the world, and yes, it was imporatnt, but it is not equated with the return of Christ, except in your view where the only thing that is ever literal is "shortly" and "this generation". The spiritual presence of Christ began with the coming of the Spirit. There is no other "spiritual coming" after that, as that would constitute basically a second Spirit, or fourth member of the Godhead.
) When one mortal person talls another "soon", it can only be within their lifetimes. With God, this is not necessarily so. Yes, I often wonder why 2000 years. But just because I can't understand that, I'm not going to go and say, "well it all happened already; This is all God has promised us". That is basically losing hope. And taking every promise and making it for this age makes completely vague what God has for us for eternity. The only sure thing, it seems, is this short life in the church.
Time-statements must be interpreted in the context they were given. Last days would fit a 40 year time frame considering it is speaking of the end of the Old Covenant. Considering the Old Covenant was centuries in length “last days would fit. “At hand” would fit that same category.
I believe when God communicates with man it is in terms man can understand. To say God gives us time-statements but we can’t really use them leads to nothing but confusion.
Why not take God at His word as to the “when”, and leave yourself room to error on the “how.”
What was being restored is Ex 34: 7 keeping lovingkindness for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin; and that will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation.
He did just that.
Jesus says John was the prophesied Elijah. Not a type. He is only a type if you have a view that forces Elijah into the future despite the words of Jesus.
Thats right. They like you thought He would bring in a physical Kingdom.
Yes, metaphore for the New Covenant. But not the eternal Heaven.
Spiritual death. Separation from God.
.
You have completely lost me.
As I said earlier 2 Cor. 5 tells us what happens upon our death:
So if someone died at the age of 80, will they have a glorified Body of 80? Christ still had His scars will those with disabilities still have them such as being born with no hands? Will God create a hand for them in their glorified body or will it be strictly how Jesus was what you had is what you get?
So what are the dead in now? Anything? Or are they just floating around?
They are outside the city, but they are encouraged to come and drink from the water of life.
19 in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
Yes, but I don't believe that is the scriptual definition of "sting".
So that new heaven and earth in Is. 65:17 did exist?
The church is a spititual entity. All who are inside the New Jerusalem are clothed in white. Inside a church building(physical) you will find sinners.
Only to make sense in a physical fulfillment. If physical fulfillment was not what was intended, then it makes perfect sense as read. The Old Covenant and its physical types were pointing to the Spiritual realites of the New Covenant.
And what is more clear than the time-statements? Both the world order changed (Old Covenant economy) and the curse (separation from God) ended . To make everything a ridged, physical interpretation is to miss completely what I beleive God intended.
Acts and Josephus record all these things.
End of the Age, not world. For signs in the skies see Josephus, he records some stuff happening in the sky that I have difficulty believing. The judgements were real, not "spiritualized".
1. Jesus told Caiaphus and the elders they would see it. Matt 26:64, He told His disciples some would still be alive to see it. Matt 16:28
Once again, all that means is that it was ready to occur with John. In the OT, Messiah still had to come the first time and die and rise again. By John's time, all of that had occurred already, so nothing else prophetic or apart of the plan had to happen before the final events began unfurling.
The Hebrew word translated "at hand" is different from the Greek, which, as I showed last page, allow for a figurative meaning.
What proof do you have this is "all things"? This is from when God gave Moses the new tablets, which was like another chance. God always promised this if the people repented (and the judgments was for then they didn't repent). It was apart of and the heart of the Law. How can you arbitarily select this as something fulfilled by John?
Not that many, relatively speaking. The nation, as a whole, rejected him and Jesus.
That's like saying "People seeing Christ come back is figuative only if you have a view that forces the Second Coming to be spiritual despite the words of Jesus". (as well as negating the coming of Jesus in the Holy Spirit, AD33). One is a type, another is an antitype.
No, their mistake was expecting only one coming. Christ told Peter, in effect, that the physical Kingdom would be restored, but that that was up to the Father's timing, and not their concern. (A proof it would be far off).
Rev. 20 speaks of eternity. If that really refers to thie age, how do you know there is another "eternal heaven"?
"never dying" is eternal separation from God? I think you were answering the next question that you cut off; "what is death?" Still, I do not see where you are getting all these statments about what eternity is when all the scriptures teaching on it are said to refer to this life.
How do you know which is which? Your theory says the final judgment was in AD70!
just what I am saying. They way you are spiritualizing these things, you can spiritualize anything and everything in scripture, and people do (Christian Science, etc)
That's the resurrection body, which as 1 Cor. puts it, is sown, and then raised.
Christ's scars are a memorial of what He did for us. As for age and deformities, both are apart of the Fall, and will be among the things remedied in our new bodies. People believe the body will be whatever age it was at its peak in strength, but then, this will no longer be an "age". It will no longer be in a state of decay, which we call "aging".
I believe they are asleep in Christ. Now there are different interpretations of what that means, but the pre-resurrected state is not what we are promised. It is apparently all there is in your system.
Those in Hell can't enter in. That is the point of it. It does not mean they are there living among the saved. V.17 is an invitation to the reader (after reading all of these promises —including the river of life; encouraging him to come to Christ and take part of it), not those "outside the city", because they "shall in no wise enter in". Only those in the Lamb's Book of Life. And this after the proclamation "He who is unjust, let him be unjust still; he who is filthy, let him be filthy still, he who is righteous, let him be righteous still; he who is holy, let him be holy still" (v.11). Whoever is in, is in, and the wicked are said to be "outside", but this is another realm where they are truly "separated". This clearly is after the first death, resurrection and final judgment. Another thing that just occurred to me, is that in your view, there would be no first and second death, but physical death would mark both for the wicked. But this is not what any of the scriptures teach.
I knew you were going to say that. But it clearly is apart of the curse. Why mention "for out of the dust you were taken, and to the dust you shall return" if that was a given? He would not have had to return to the dust if he hadn't sinned. The Fall affected every part of man's being. Spiritually, he died instantly, physically, he would decay away, and decay is not apart of Creation as God designed it and called it "good".
I have too. A lot of us have. It is one of those great mysteries.
Whether it is the pain of spiritual death, or of physical death, it carries the same connotation. It is both.
That's what would have if Israel had accepted the Messiah (and John before Him, of course).
So if the sinners can still be physically present with the saints, then what difference does being spiritually "outside" mean?
The OT had physical types with the spiritual meanings behind them even then. The entire Law is an example. So the NT would be dual as well, with the immediate spiritual types being our down-payment to the ultimate realities in the resurrection.
But separation from God has not ended. There are billions of lost today (still in this realm, not finally separated yet). When I spoke of the world order, I meant the system of human govt. and sin. Israel was to be God's Government, but the lesson He wrote through them was that they too were sinners, and man needed a whole new nature. So as another nation of sinners, yes, they did in that sense represent the "old order" of the world, and God ended that phase of His plan. But that is not the end of the plan altogether. God will one day end the entire system of human govt. and sin.
</font>[/QUOTE]
In thjat case, why then couldn't God simply tell them "Look, what the world needs is not a physical kingdom at all, but just to be saved from sin. That is IT! So in the new kingdom I am bringing you, even though you will still have to live in a world of sin and physical pain and death; you will still be persecuted, and hated of all nations, etc. but be of good cheer, when you die, you will go to Heaven. That is what is important". They would understand that. Why all the language that could easily be mistaken for a literal kingdom? Well, obviously, Jesus was not always as clear as He could be, for after all, the Jews though He would only come once and restore the physical kingdom. If they got that wrong, from reading the scriptures, then it is not always clear. A hint Jesus gave us, was speaking in parables to actually make it less clear, so that the hardned Jews wouldn't get it, but those called by Him would. So much of prophecy is in parables, and the constant reminder to us is "he who has ears to hear, let him hear"; "let him who has understanding calculate...". You are taking one word; "at hand", and then building this doctrine of a completely spiritual coming, and bending everything else to fit, leaving an uncertain, undiscussed eternity, a coming of the Holy Spirit that accomplished nothing —the Church was still lost, and they needed another divine presence for Jesus to actually be with them; and a world where death and suffering continues forever; apparently apart of God's original creation all along anyway. So many questions unanswered, and loose ends left open. You are the one making the same mistake as the Jews, not me and that is how we know which. They wanted it right now, and you wanted it right then.
OK, so there were false Messiahs we overlooked. I'll grant you that. Still, it got worse after AD70, rather than the Church becoming the Kingdom. One thing I do not see in these propecises is that "these things will all continue in the world after I come in the clouds and judge all, but they will be 'outside the city', so it won't matter to you". No, Christ's final return would mark the end of all of this sin on earth. That mean that whatever happened back then could be no more than a type. Once again, I am not doing that just to win the argument the easy way. That is how it must be to fit in with what the prophecises are actually promising.
So signs in the sky might be literal/visible. But then the historicist SDA's and others use claims that the sun, moon and stars were literally darkened or become red, etc. a few centuries ago. If it is true, then once again, we have the past preterist type, the historicist type, and a future antitype, proving pluralism.
Since you are interested in what our church fathers taught,none were pre trib. Not till the 1800's anyway. You see no holes because you cannot see.
Good, then we agree, we cannot just say something is truth just because the church fathers say so.
You agree with Paul and John?
Start with Rev 1:1-3,James 5:8,Matt 16:27-28 etc...then you will get your eschatology correct.
Wrong.
Wrong.
Well, did they get rest then? According to your view, they continued to suffer persecution after this "coming". If you try to make this spiritual, first, the fact that it specifies "persecutors" means it is more than just spiritual; the spiritual "rest" would help us with all our trials, not just persecution. Second, Jesus said in the Gospels that they would have this spiritual rest if they come after Him. That was right away, (and available to the rest of the Church when the Spirit was poured out AD33), not AD70.
No, not what Paul taught them, but yes, they believe something more like your view, and Paul corrects them by showing what must happen first. Even the AD64-70 events that we have mentioned do not seem to completely fulfill this, such as the lawless one. (Does not completely match Nero or any other emperor, and certainly not any Jewish leader). Also, even with the false messiahs in Acts and those who followed them, still, this did not equal a "falling away" in the Church to the extent Paul is suggesting.
Not after the Jews were killed and dispersed. It was the Judaizers who were accusing,persecuting and killing members of the early church.
The man of lawlessness was already at work. That puts him in the 1st century context. There are some who believe it to be one of the leaders of the Zealots.
What verse indicates to what extent the falling away would be according to Paul.
Let me ask you some questions so I can get your understanding.
http://www.apocalipsis.org/preterism.htm