Are anti-preterists all Dispensationalists?

[robycop3]

Lodic, here's another nail in the preterist coffin:
Rev. 19:
19 And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. 20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh.

The Roman army that destroyed J & the temple was NOT destroyed! It returned to Rome IN TRIUMPH, carrying much loot from the city & the temple. They erected an arch to honor their commander, Titus, which stands to this very day!

 

[Calminian]

...I should clarify that I am a "Partial Preterist". I believe the last couple of chapters of Revelation are still in our future, and I look forward to His glorious (physical) return. .....

BTW, partial preterism, the view that the tribulation has passed and is not immediately followed by the return of Christ, is refuted by Jesus, himself.

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.​

 

[Lodic]

Not sure what you're talking about. The 70th week is not the crucifixion. That happens after the 69 weeks after the time of the triumphant entry when Christ is presented as the Messiah and rejected. This is before the crucifixion and destruction of Jerusalem and before the covenant with Israel. There is a clearly expressed game between the 69th and 70th week, and no gap at all implied between the tribulation and second coming.

I started this response with the intention of explaining my view of the "70 Weeks" timeline. However, the best laid plans of mice and men... Some things have come up, and I won't be able to address this for a few hours. My apologies.

 

[Lodic]

But, far as we know, that transfiguration was the only such one Jesus did here on earth, and not all the disciples saw it. OF COURSE they were alive at that time! But the others died without seeing such an event, so Jesus' statement makes perfect sense.

The only thing that would really make sense is if He is referring to a time far enough off - say, about 40 years - where many of His audience would probably have died. That brings us back to the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem.

No, they're related to the end of the current "Age of Grace".

No such thing as an "Age of Grace".

But such suffering has been going on ever since then.

Of course. However, Peter was referring to their specific suffering.

Then, once again - IF THEY'VE ALREADY OCCURRED, HOW COME THEY'RE NOT FOUND IN HISTORY????????????????????????????????????????????

History, when viewed in light of Scripture, has proven these events have come to pass.

There can only be ONE interpretive method - EXACTLY AS WRITTEN in their original language.

To be sure, Scripture is its own interpreter. Yet, there are so many different views on what Scripture tells us. We don't just disagree on eschatology, but other Christians disagree regarding the nature of the Holy Spirit, baptism, age of the earth, and a plethora of different things. As I'm sure you would agree, the best we can do is let the Holy Spirit guide us in proper understanding of what the Scriptures tell us.

 

[Lodic]

Lodic, here's another nail in the preterist coffin:
Rev. 19:
19 And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. 20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh.

The Roman army that destroyed J & the temple was NOT destroyed! It returned to Rome IN TRIUMPH, carrying much loot from the city & the temple. They erected an arch to honor their commander, Titus, which stands to this very day!

You can't put "another nail in the preterist coffin" unless you find a "first" nail - which you have not done (and never will).
The Beast and False Prophet being cast into the Lake of Fire is probably yet to be fulfilled. Having said that, the language also fits what literally happened in AD 70. I'd be lying if I said that I understood more of Revelation than I really do.

Of course the temple was destroyed. Even if it was carried back to Rome, it was in pieces. It was definitely destroyed where the Jews could no longer use it.

 

[Calminian]

You can't put "another nail in the preterist coffin" unless you find a "first" nail - which you have not done (and never will).....

I think what you're confused about is there are so many nails, you can't keep track of them. It's a matter of not being able to see the forest through the trees.

 

[robycop3]

BTW, partial preterism, the view that the tribulation has passed and is not immediately followed by the return of Christ, is refuted by Jesus, himself.

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.​

YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT!
I've posted those 2 verses several times to PROVE that, if the great trib has already occurred, Jesus is long-overdue!
But I think we both believe that the trib has NOT yet occurred, & that's why Jesus hasn't yet returned.

 

[Lodic]

I think what you're confused about is there are so many nails, you can't keep track of them. It's a matter of not being able to see the forest through the trees.

I will be the first to admit that I don't understand all of the prophecies that we have been discussing. However, I will not let the parts that I do not know cause me to believe in an eschatological position that does not fit unless you force it. BTW, I still plan to provide the way I believe the 70 Weeks timeline plays out, but it will be an hour or so.

 

[robycop3]

The only thing that would really make sense is if He is referring to a time far enough off - say, about 40 years - where many of His audience would probably have died. That brings us back to the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem.

Not at all. Jesus didn't preserve His words til now for no reason.

No such thing as an "Age of Grace".

MMRRPP ! WRONG !
Titus 2:11For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,
Titus 3:7so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Now, what is grace? UNMERITED FAVOR! You must agree that we didn't deserve to be saved or for Jesus to die for OUR sins!

Of course. However, Peter was referring to their specific suffering.

Can you PROVE it? Of course not.

History, when viewed in light of Scripture, has proven these events have come to pass.

MMRRPP ! WRONG AGAIN !
Those events are nowhere in history! I challenge you to show otherwise ! ! Use any legitimate work of history you choose! I'LL BE WAITING!

To be sure, Scripture is its own interpreter. Yet, there are so many different views on what Scripture tells us. We don't just disagree on eschatology, but other Christians disagree regarding the nature of the Holy Spirit, baptism, age of the earth, and a plethora of different things. As I'm sure you would agree, the best we can do is let the Holy Spirit guide us in proper understanding of what the Scriptures tell us.

That's what I have done, disregarding the opinions, imaginings, guesswork, & private interps of other men. OTOH, you are under the evil influence of a gang of quack booksellers whose stuff is phony as a Ford Corvette & who won't hesitate to lie to sell their boox. I really wouldn't wanna be in any of their shoes if they die in their present state & hafta face Jesus on His great white throne!

 

[robycop3]

You can't put "another nail in the preterist coffin" unless you find a "first" nail - which you have not done (and never will).

Actually, there's a barrel of nails that DelMar, Preston, etc. have whitewashed so you don't see them.

The Beast and False Prophet being cast into the Lake of Fire is probably yet to be fulfilled. Having said that, the language also fits what literally happened in AD 70. I'd be lying if I said that I understood more of Revelation than I really do.

It's not at all hard to understand if you keep earlier prophecies in mind & fit them all together. We see the prophecies that have been fulfilled so far have been LITERALLY fulfilled, to the letter as they were originally written. No valid reason the rest won't be fulfilled just-as-literally. NONE !

Of course the temple was destroyed. Even if it was carried back to Rome, it was in pieces. It was definitely destroyed where the Jews could no longer use it.

yes, that prophecy was fulfilled TO THE LETTER. The Romans believed there was gold secreted between the temple's stones, so they pulled it apart seeking it. But the Orthodox Jews kept right on worshipping according to the Old Covenant in their synagogues, same as they still do today. They just didn't sacrifice animals any more.

But you missed the point I made, showing you the SCRIPTURE that makes that point. The Roman army was NOT DESTROYED! They returned to Rome IN TRIUMPH, & erected that arch honoring Titus, an arch that still stands today!

 

[Lodic]

Not at all. Jesus didn't preserve His words til now for no reason.

Of course Jesus didn't mince or waste His words. He spoke very clearly (except parables, but that's another subject). That's why it simply doesn't follow that the Transfiguration was not what He was talking about there.

MMRRPP ! WRONG !
Titus 2:11For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,
Titus 3:7so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Now, what is grace? UNMERITED FAVOR! You must agree that we didn't deserve to be saved or for Jesus to die for OUR sins!

I never said there was no such thing as grace. That would be blasphemy, wouldn't it? If it wasn't for His grace, we would all face the condemnation that we deserve. I am saying there is no such thing as an "age of grace". From the Crucifixion onward, we are under His grace, and not the Law. Having said that, is this what you were referring to? If so, I do apologize, as I took your phrase as a type of "dispensation". Since you are not a "Dispensationalist", I did think that was a bit odd.

That's what I have done, disregarding the opinions, imaginings, guesswork, & private interps of other men. OTOH, you are under the evil influence of a gang of quack booksellers whose stuff is phony as a Ford Corvette & who won't hesitate to lie to sell their boox. I really wouldn't wanna be in any of their shoes if they die in their present state & hafta face Jesus on His great white throne!

Fine. Each of us have let the Scriptures interpret themselves, but we have completely different views on this subject.

 

[David Kent]

Lodic, here's another nail in the preterist coffin:
Rev. 19:
19 And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. 20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh.

The Roman army that destroyed J & the temple was NOT destroyed! It returned to Rome IN TRIUMPH, carrying much loot from the city & the temple. They erected an arch to honor their commander, Titus, which stands to this very day!

Well I am not preterist and certainly not a futurist. So that answers your question in the OP.

As to your quote from Revelation. It is plainly symbolic. 21 And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. The sword that proceeded from the mouth can only refer to the gospel.

 

[Lodic]

Actually, there's a barrel of nails that DelMar, Preston, etc. have whitewashed so you don't see them.

The Scriptures are the basis for my views. If DeMar and company deviate from the Scriptures, I'll drop them like a bad habit. Until then, they do a pretty good job of exposition.

It's not at all hard to understand if you keep earlier prophecies in mind & fit them all together. We see the prophecies that have been fulfilled so far have been LITERALLY fulfilled, to the letter as they were originally written. No valid reason the rest won't be fulfilled just-as-literally. NONE !

To make all of that fit, I would have to incorporate the false teachings of the futurist view. I will not let the parts that I'm not sure of drive me back into a belief that I know is based on incorrect interpretations of Scripture.

yes, that prophecy was fulfilled TO THE LETTER. The Romans believed there was gold secreted between the temple's stones, so they pulled it apart seeking it. But the Orthodox Jews kept right on worshipping according to the Old Covenant in their synagogues, same as they still do today. They just didn't sacrifice animals any more.

But you missed the point I made, showing you the SCRIPTURE that makes that point. The Roman army was NOT DESTROYED! They returned to Rome IN TRIUMPH, & erected that arch honoring Titus, an arch that still stands today!

Without the animal sacrifices, they do not worship as before. The Roman army did not need to be destroyed to fulfill the prophecies.

 

[Lodic]

BTW, partial preterism, the view that the tribulation has passed and is not immediately followed by the return of Christ, is refuted by Jesus, himself.

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.​

This "sun, moon, and stars" language is symbolic. We find similar phrases throughout the OT. Notice in verse 30 that "the tribes of the earth will mourn". The tribes refers to Israel, and the earth to the land of Israel (specifically around Jerusalem). Daniel 7:13, which Jesus references, has the Son of Man ascending UP to the Ancient of Days - not coming DOWN to set up a kingdom.

As promised earlier, here is how I view the "70 Weeks" prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27. Verse 24 shows us the purpose of the 70 weeks is to "make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up the vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place". Verse 25 tells us that there will be 69 weeks from "the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince". This decree was proclaimed at the end of the Judean Exile in 458 BC.
Contrary to the "Futurist" viewpoint, there is no basis in Scripture for a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks. In the midst of the 70th week, Jesus was cut off in the Crucifixion.
According to the "Futurist" view, the 70th week refers to "the Antichrist" who will make a covenant with the Jews. As the theory goes, this covenant will allow them to offer sacrifices in a 3rd "rebuilt" temple for 7 years. Unfortunately, after 3 1/2 years, he will break the covenant, sacrifices cease, etc. While that is a popular view, I suggest it is incorrect.

Christ is the One Who made a "firm covenant with the many for one week" with the Last Supper. This was the beginning of the New Covenant. Christ put a stop to the offerings by becoming the Final Sacrifice. The "sanctuary whose end will come with a flood" was the 2nd Temple - not an imaginary 3rd one. The "prince who is to come" (vs. 26) was Titus, who destroyed the city and the sanctuary.

 

[Calminian]

This "sun, moon, and stars" language is symbolic. We find similar phrases throughout the OT. Notice in verse 30 that "the tribes of the earth will mourn". The tribes refers to Israel, and the earth to the land of Israel (specifically around Jerusalem). Daniel 7:13, which Jesus references, has the Son of Man ascending UP to the Ancient of Days - not coming DOWN to set up a kingdom........

All I can say is it's amazing how preterists rationalize. They'll do mental gymnastics to avoid the plain simple reading of the text, and jump hoops to find an imaginary gap between Rev. 18 and 19. Regarding a post tribulation gap, let God be true and every man a liar.

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.​

 

[Calminian]

...As to your quote from Revelation. It is plainly symbolic....

Translation: Symbols are used therefore I can pick any meaning I like, and don't need to find any context from the Bible.

Are preterists and the like really this ignorant about how to approach symbols?

 

[Lodic]

All I can say is it's amazing how preterists rationalize. They'll do mental gymnastics to avoid the plain simple reading of the text, and jump hoops to find an imaginary gap between Rev. 18 and 19. Regarding a post tribulation gap, let God be true and every man a liar.

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.​

You realize, of course, that we preterists take the same view of those in the "futurist" camp. You accuse us of reading things into the plain meaning of Scripture. Yet, you have to make things up and twist the plain meanings of the texts in order to fit it to your view. Futurists tend to interpret Scripture by eisegesis, where you read a doctrine into the passage, instead of exegesis, where you draw out what the text actually means.

"Let God be true and every man a liar" is indeed a great passage to remember. Scripture is always right, even when we don't understand it, and especially if we disagree with it.

I would like to compliment you and the others for keeping to the subject, and never resorting to attacks. I dropped "Disqus" (a similar website) because of personal attacks that I often saw and sometimes experienced. Whether or not we agree, it's nice to have such a civil discussion.

 

[Calminian]

You realize, of course, that we preterists take the same view of those in the "futurist" camp. ....

And with some I have no idea how to respond. They'll literally say anything.

 

[Lodic]

And with some I have no idea how to respond. They'll literally say anything.

I can identify. (Present company is an exception, of course.) Sometimes you just have no idea where they are coming from. Maybe I have a slight advantage over the "futurists" in that I held that view myself for over 30 years.

 

[Calminian]

I can identify. (Present company is an exception, of course.) Sometimes you just have no idea where they are coming from. Maybe I have a slight advantage over the "futurists" in that I held that view myself for over 30 years.

I seriously doubt that. You don't seem to understand any of the views have lost all credibility.