• 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!

Christology and Preterism

Status
Not open for further replies.

prophecy70

Active Member
So, you know the Historic Chilliast position and held it for 20 years? Great. Outline it for me. (Don't Google it, just tell me from your own knowledge what Historic Chilliasm teaches.)

I meant the pre trib premillennial side. I do not know exactly what historical chilliast is. Besides that most of them thought 6000 years would pass and the 7th would be the Sabbath? My apologies if I said your side meaning historical chilliast. I didn't mean exactly that.
 

prophecy70

Active Member
Second Coming of whom?

You conveniently overlook "This Jesus" not "This Titus".

It can't be both.

It was not Titus the Roman general who was "taken up from you into heaven" but Jesus Christ the Son of God who will be returning visibly -
they were looking into the PHYSICAL sky with their PHYSICAL eyes (not mentioned in the Luke passage about the hen and chicks).

They/We LOOK with our PHYSICAL eyes not our imagination:

Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.



HankD


Literally it can't be who that pierce them either. Today's Jewish people didn't literally peirce him. Then literally it can't be at hand. Or coming quickly. Or coming soon. Or this generation. Or the people standing here will not taste death.

What's literal and what's not?
 

agedman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Texas chilli is distinguished from all others.

It contains no beans.

A chilliast is one that makes outstanding chilli.

Anyone ever been to a Texas chilli cookoff?

:)
 

agedman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Literally it can't be who that pierce them either. Today's Jewish people didn't literally peirce him. Then literally it can't be at hand. Or coming quickly. Or coming soon. Or this generation. Or the people standing here will not taste death.

What's literal and what's not?
Actually, just as the prophet's state.

"They will look on Him who they pierced..." refers to the cross. It is a prophecy concerning the Cross and the people looking at the body of Christ prior to it being taken down.

See John 19, spoken first by Zachariah. Again, the continuum of prophecy builds signs, one upon another, and takes no single sign as an indication.

However, because there is abundant portrayals in art of the one pierced, "they" can refer to any who look at the marks of the Christ.

The song writer said, "I shall know Him by the prints in His hands."
 

prophecy70

Active Member
Chiliast, When Im on my phone, weird things can happen. Between Autocorrect and my fat fingers, You will never know what you get :Biggrin
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Literally it can't be who that pierce them either. Today's Jewish people didn't literally peirce him. Then literally it can't be at hand. Or coming quickly. Or coming soon. Or this generation. Or the people standing here will not taste death.

What's literal and what's not?
Yes it does mean the Jewish people.

I am of Jewish heritage and Jews have carried this burden for 2 millennia - forced upon them yes, but real
nonetheless.

We found out our family heritage several years ago when we had our family tree researched for some legal discrepancies because of the spelling of our family name (on my maternal grandmothers side)..

When my Jewish forefathers came to America they changed the spelling of their name to hide their identity as Jews because of antisemitism in Boston.

BTW When did Titus become Jesus - Do you have a passage of scripture?

HankD
 

agedman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
OFTEN the stuff online about the chiliast links the view to typical dispensational pre-millennium teaching such as Darby held.

That just isn't true, and I wish more people understood the difference.

Even on this board, there are those that confuse and blend into one the two.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Texas chilli is distinguished from all others.

It contains no beans.

A chilliast is one that makes outstanding chilli.

Anyone ever been to a Texas chilli cookoff?

:)
Yes! Believe or Not (remember that newspaper blurb?) in a Texas Chili house in Maine on the way from Belfast to Rockport Maine.
A Texan opened it - don't remember the name but we went there a couple of times before we moved out here to WA State.

Outstanding Texas BBQ and chili everything!

HankD
 

agedman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yes it does mean the Jewish people.

I am of Jewish heritage and Jews have carried this burden for 2 millennia - forced upon them yes, but real
nonetheless.

We found out our family heritage several years ago when we had our family tree researched for some legal discrepancies because of the spelling of our family name (on my maternal grandmothers side)..

When my Jewish forefathers came to America they changed the spelling of their name to hide their identity as Jews because of antisemitism in Boston.

BTW When did Titus become Jesus - Do you have a passage of scripture?

HankD
More often the burden was thrust upon them by folks such as Martin Luther.

One of my favorite people in the past was Dr. Hyman Appelman. Here is a clip about him from the radio program "unshackled."
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
That's why I live in Texas. Fat Daddy's. The best BBQ in the Rio Grande Valley! :D

(But I make my own Chili. Much better than what you can get in a restaurant.)
 

prophecy70

Active Member
OFTEN the stuff online about the chiliast links the view to typical dispensational pre-millennium teaching such as Darby held.

That just isn't true, and I wish more people understood the difference.

Even on this board, there are those that confuse and blend into one the two.

Tcass can explain it to me in PM if he wants. I like knowledge, even if I don't believe something.
 

agedman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I do not believe this, I believe what it says "those who pierced him", That generation.
Who is the audience of John 19?

What is the audience of Zachariah 12, from which the prophecy statement came.

It cannot mean "that generation, exclusively."

For the Cross was on a public highway in which all who passed by could gawk (any nationality) at the spectacle.

Also, look at the prophecy of Zachariah. One cannot escape (typical of many prophetic statements concerning the messiah) the dual imagery.

10“I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn. 11“In that day there will be great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the plain of Megiddo. 12“The land will mourn, every family by itself; the family of the house of David by itself and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself and their wives by themselves; 13the family of the house of Levi by itself and their wives by themselves; the family of the Shimeites by itself and their wives by themselves; 14all the families that remain, every family by itself and their wives by themselves.​

The piercing took place on the Cross.

However, the state of mourning, and the Spirit of grace and supplication was not poured out on the inhabitants of Jerusalem at that time, nor at any time to date.

How does one know that it wasn't? Look at the specificity of the prophecy.

“The land will mourn, every family by itself; the family of the house of David by itself and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself and their wives by themselves; 13the family of the house of Levi by itself and their wives by themselves; the family of the Shimeites by itself and their wives by themselves; 14all the families that remain, every family by itself and their wives by themselves.
At no time in history has such mourning of all Jews taken place over the piercing of the Messiah. It hasn't happened. Notice how that the family mourns, but the wives have even a far greater mourning?

Why?

In my opinion, it is because the heritage of the Jews is maternal, that is the mother's heritage is what determines if one is a Jew, not the fathers. This is unlike the typical Gentile thinking. Modern Jews can be by either father or mother, however, historically it was through the mother. So, the mother's mourn because the family heritage held in their trust demands such mourning.

Therefore, (irregardless of my opinion, above) the statement cannot be rendered as YOU would ascribe to be time limited to that generation.
 

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
More often the burden was thrust upon them by folks such as Martin Luther.

Folks such as Martin Luther were simply the avenue. Ultimately the burden came from Jehovah:

63 And it shall come to pass, that, as Jehovah rejoiced over you to do you good, and to multiply you, so Jehovah will rejoice over you to cause you to perish [see Revelation 18:20], and to destroy you; and ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou goest in to possess it. Dt 28
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top