Continuing the eschatology

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 3 PM Pacific.

 

[David Kent]

I was wondering the same thing.

The only scheme in which the prophets would fit is premill.

Too often the ones who reject premillennialism are actually rejecting the LaHaye/Jenkins propaganda, not being understanding that their view is but a single scheme in which premillennialism can be considered.

Not all dispensation schemes are “Darby dispensation.”

Dispensations can be used merely as a tool to present a useable outline of Scripture. It is as using covenates, or archeological terms, a way of referring to periods of time.

Of course not. On another site someone listed many writers before 1800 who he said were dispensationalist. Among them John Newton. Well it seems that he gathered all the names that mentioned dispensation and included them. Well those that studied at the time seemed to mention two dispensation, The Old and the New (Testaments or covenants, if you will.)

 

[David Kent]

Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 3 PM Pacific.

I came late to this thread and haven't finished reading it yet.

 

[Yeshua1]

Of course not. On another site someone listed many writers before 1800 who he said were dispensationalist. Among them John Newton. Well it seems that he gathered all the names that mentioned dispensation and included them. Well those that studied at the time seemed to mention two dispensation, The Old and the New (Testaments or covenants, if you will.)

the prominent viewpoint held in the first 3 centuries of the church was historical premil.

 

[robycop3]

Return? Or coming? What about the 'coming' before the day of the Lord in 2 Thes. 2? And is that 'coming' a special coming against this generation of Israelites, or Jesus final coming?

And why are there so many opinions?

Off to play tennis ...

I believe it's pretty obvious that Jesus was once here, and that he departed. So, any coming after that departure has to be a "return".

 

[prophecy70]

Very easy to find, Sir!

Paul, in 2 Thess. 2. describes a "man of sin" who will sit in the temple & proclaim himself to be God. That's about as antichrist as one can get! (He's first mentioned in Daniel 9.)

Then, there's Rev. 13, describing both this same man and his deputy, a miracle-working false prophet.

Since the "abomination of desolation" didn't occur in the 2nd temple, there will hafta be a 3rd one.

As for the trib, Jesus prophesied it in Matt. 24, saying if it weren't cut short, no flesh(man or animal) would survive. I believe its allotted time is 3.5 years, but Jesus will cut it short before all that time elapses.

That is not a written view. Sorry. Please answer my other post. about The explanation of the OT verses.

 

[David Kent]

Very easy to find, Sir!

Paul, in 2 Thess. 2. describes a "man of sin" who will sit in the temple & proclaim himself to be God. That's about as antichrist as one can get! (He's first mentioned in Daniel 9.)

Then, there's Rev. 13, describing both this same man and his deputy, a miracle-working false prophet.

Since the "abomination of desolation" didn't occur in the 2nd temple, there will hafta be a 3rd one.

As for the trib, Jesus prophesied it in Matt. 24, saying if it weren't cut short, no flesh(man or animal) would survive. I believe its allotted time is 3.5 years, but Jesus will cut it short before all that time elapses.

I agree with your first point. But the temple is the Church. Paul said "You are the temple of the living God." The Pope sits in Christ's seat, just as the Pharisees sat in Moses' seat. Except that the Antichrist is nowhere mentioned in Daniel 9. That is not a literal understanding. it is bending scripture to fit your preconceived ideas.

 

[robycop3]

Oh but I believe it has.

Oh, REALLY?

Then, how come real Christians are a minority worldwide, especially among the Jews?

 

[asterisktom]

And a terrible way of showing it. Thats all Ill say on the forum. Im waiting to see more of asterisktoms replies.

I am wanting to repk

Yesterday I wept and prayed with a schizophrenic man after doing a Bible study with him. Today I am spending a very large amount of time on the BB with a young man who seems confused about many things. I do have compassion for you, but little patience for preterism.

I can tell you have little patience for preterism. That, of course, makes discussion with you difficult. Unfortunate. But I am also reminded of the time when I had a discussion board and I was very hard on those preterists - especially those nasty full-blown preterists.

But they provoked me into a closer study of God's precious Word. And eventually I came around.

Don't lose patience with me. I am a fellow brother in Christ who loves the Lord and who loves God's Word. And I know I am always required to speak the truth as I see it responsibly, soberly, lovingly. I don't care that you quote Doctor This or Professor That (You tend to over do this) but when you - or anyone else quotes Scripture - I always look it up if I don't know it. I am here to learn. But I am also here to share what I know.

 

[robycop3]

So the moon turning to blood in appearance has never happened before?

Im not trying to be silly, Im trying to figure out what your key to literalism is.

So how do you explain this? Im asking seriously How?

Ezekiel 32:7-8
7 And when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light.

8 All the bright lights of heaven will I make dark over thee, and set darkness upon thy land, saith the Lord God.

Amos 8:9
"In that day," declares the Sovereign LORD, "I will make the sun go down at noon and darken the earth in broad daylight.

Isaiah 34:4-5
4 All the host of heaven shall be dissolved,
And the heavens shall be rolled up like a scroll;
All their host shall fall down
As the leaf falls from the vine,
And as fruit falling from a fig tree.
5 “For My sword shall be bathed in heaven;
Indeed it shall come down on Edom,
And on the people of My curse, for judgment.

So, you don't believe those events will occur?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Yes, the angels present when He ascended said He will return in LIKE manner, not EXACT manner. He will simply DESCEND. Difference is, He will return in great glory and power. I tend to believe He will be seated upon a horse, as described in the Revelation.

A lotta emphasis has been placed on clouds at both His departure and return. When he ascended, He vanished into a cloud, as an aircraft does now. I believe once He was outta mens' sight, He instantly "teleported" to heaven. When He returns, He will appear SUDDENLY from a cloud. The antichrist will summon his army, which, thanx to modern tech, will arrive quickly, but Jesus will destroy it with His spoken word, and the antichrist, with his deputy, the false prophet, will be cast alive into the lake of fire, as prophesied.

Yep! The important thing is that He's coming-- really, truly-- and physically!. And if we want to be like 1st Century Christians, we should be eagerly awaiting Him (1 Corinthians 1:7; Philippians 3:20-21; 1 Thessalonians 1:9-10; Titus 2:11-13; Hebrews 9:28; 2 Peter 3:12).

 

[David Kent]

I am not a big cut/paste person, however this was online and perhaps is helpful in the discussion.

The only reason to place it on the forum is to show that there is missinformed.

There are other early church leaders not included in the cut /paste that can be found at:
The Millennial Voice of the Early Church Fathers


"Among the Apostolic Fathers Barnabas is the first and the only one who expressly teaches a pre-millennial reign of Christ on earth. He considers the Mosaic history of the creation a type of six ages of labor for the world, each lasting a thousand years, and of a millennium of rest; since with God 'one day is as a thousand years.' The millennial Sabbath on earth will be followed by an eighth and eternal day in a new world, of which the Lord's Day (called by Barnabas 'the eighth day') is the type."49 While the seventh millennial day theory is not taught in Scripture, it is significant that the basic understanding of this early writing is that of a literal thousand-year reign on earth at the end of the age.50

"Irenaeus wrote the following concerning the blessings of the future Kingdom of God foretold in the Scriptures: 'The predicted blessing, therefore, belongs unquestionably to the times of the kingdom, when the righteous shall bear rule upon their rising from the dead; when also the creation, having been renovated and set free, shall fructify with an abundance of all kinds of food, from the dew of heaven, and from the fertility of the earth: as the elders who saw John, the disciple of the Lord, related that they had heard from him how the Lord used to teach in regard to these times.'"54 "Irenaeus stated in even stronger terms than Justin that the premillennial doctrine was 'traditional orthodoxy.' He spoke of 'certain orthodox person' whose opinions were 'derived from heretical sources,' and asserted that 'they are both ignorant of God's dispensations, and of the mystery of the resurrection of the just, and of the [earthly] kingdom.'"55 "Irenaeus, on the strength of tradition from St. John and his disciples, taught that after the destruction of the Roman empire, and the brief raging of antichrist (lasting three and a half years or 1260 days), Christ will visibly appear, will bind Satan, will reign at the rebuilt city of Jerusalem with the little band of faithful confessors and the host of risen martyrs over the nations of the earth, and will celebrate the millennial sabbath of preparation for the eternal glory of heaven; then, after a temporary liberation of Satan, follows the final victory, the general resurrection, the judgment of the world, and the consummation in the new heavens and the new earth."56

Taken from:The Millennial Voice of the Early Church Fathers

I think that a number of them considered the Mil as equivalent to the seventh day of creation. A period of rest for the saints. Some more modern writers seemed to as well, some explicit, some implied.

 

[agedman]

No actually i'm not. Stop making assumptions about my motives. My question was a simple, how do you explain these passages. That is all. Im curious on how you explain them.

A diary records the events from back in the mid 1830’s.

There was a small group that stood against overwhelming odds.

Before dawn, nearly everyone in the small group had been killed, and those left were brought before the large group leader.

One of those in the small group cried out, “I’m a star.”

He wasn’t talking about Hollywood fame, but using a common idiom of the day to indicate he was an important (think of political power importance) individual.

It didn’t matter, they were all killed and burned, anyway.

“Star” can refer to a variety of items.

It can, because many political folks seek meaning by looking to star charts, be a combination of both failure in people, and what they use as predictors and guides.

It can literally be the hot gaseous objects have already been turned off and the time light travels hasn’t finished and humankind is oblivious.

What is true is that God gave very specific prophecies. Those concerning the first comming were fulfilled as they were given and not recharacterized.

Therefore, it remains reliably certain the prophecies concerning the second coming are just as trustworthy.

 

[robycop3]

People did have time to flee, just like it says, but who fled?

The people of the Church in Jerusalem were commanded by an oracle given by revelation before the war to those in the city who were worthy of it to depart and dwell in one of the cities of Perea which they called Pella. To it those who believed on Christ traveled from Jerusalem, so that when holy men had altogether deserted the royal capital of the Jews and the whole land of Judaea…"

— Eusebius, Church History 3, 5, 3

an estimated 1.1 million Jews was said to die. So who didn't flee?

If this was a global event in Matthew 24, whats it matter if you fled to the mountains anyways? You wouldn't hide from modern weapons in the mountains. And whats it matter if it was a sabbath days journey, we have cars now.

The coming attack won't worry about "collaterals". And yes, I know some Jews fled to Pella, which the Romans didn't bother with.

And this concept carries over to modern warfare. Please consider the "island-hopping" Pacific campaign of WW2 when the Allies attacked only those islands they considered important to the enemy.

 

[David Kent]

Would you accuse Phillip Schaff of this "falsehood"? He is a well-respected Church historian who had to change his books when his view on the date of Revelation changed to the early one.

For the record, my view on an early date of Revelation came after much study. I was willing to go either way, but once I saw the flimsiness of evidence for the late date I abandoned that very view I had warmer argued for.

Someone said "All history is biased," I am not sure who, but dad used to quote it often to get me to be careful when reading history.

 

[robycop3]

I am wanting to repk


I can tell you have little patience for preterism. That, of course, makes discussion with you difficult. Unfortunate. But I am also reminded of the time when I had a discussion board and I was very hard on those preterists - especially those nasty full-blown preterists.

But they provoked me into a closer study of God's precious Word. And eventually I came around.

Don't lose patience with me. I am a fellow brother in Christ who loves the Lord and who loves God's Word. And I know I am always required to speak the truth as I see it responsibly, soberly, lovingly. I don't care that you quote Doctor This or Professor That (You tend to over do this) but when you - or anyone else quotes Scripture - I always look it up if I don't know it. I am here to learn. But I am also here to share what I know.

I suggest you study history as well. The prophesied eschatological events are totally-absent from it.

Remember what the word "eschatology" means. That's what this thread is about.

Partial preterism is JUST-AS-INCORRECT as full preterism. JESUS HIMSELF proves it. If the great trib has already occurred, He is long-overdue, as He said,
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."

 

[robycop3]

That is not a written view. Sorry. Please answer my other post. about The explanation of the OT verses.

So, Paul and John didn't write? Verrry interesting...

And I believe the OT verses will cometa pass as God said.

 

[David Kent]

The coming attack won't worry about "collaterals". And yes, I know some Jews fled to Pella, which the Romans didn't bother with.

And this concept carries over to modern warfare. Please consider the "island-hopping" Pacific campaign of WW2 when the Allies attacked only those islands they considered important to the enemy.

ALL Christians did, Otherwise they would have been disobedient to the Command of Jesus. This was in AD 66 when Cestius withdrew his army from Jerusalem when almost on the point of victory. "The most serious military blunder in History."

 

[robycop3]

Still, no preterist attempts to ***PROVE*** the events they SAY have already happened, HAVE already happened. This is the THIRD such thread, & still NO PROOF!

 

[robycop3]

ALL Christians did, Otherwise they would have been disobedient to the Command of Jesus. This was in AD 66 when Cestius withdrew his army from Jerusalem when almost on the point of victory. "The most serious military blunder in History."

And then, there was PLENTY of time to flee before Titus came with another army.