prophecy70
Active Member
I think you mixed up the definition of asinine and constructive so let me help.
con·struc·tive
kənˈstrəktiv/
adjective
- 1.
serving a useful purpose; tending to build up.
-
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!
Eschatology - constructive, brotherly discussion
- Thread starter Covenanter
- Start date
I think you mixed up the definition of asinine and constructive so let me help.
con·struc·tive
kənˈstrəktiv/
adjective
The Mediatorial Kingdom ended when the times of the Gentiles began (the Babylonian Captivity). It reappeared for a very short time during the earthly ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ (the Kingdom was present with the Presence of the King), but ended again at the Ascension. It will return to earth with the return of the Lord to establish His Kingdom of God on Earth.
So? What? The transfiguration is not the fulfillment of Matthew 16:28, Luke 9:27, Mark 9:1. You make Christ appear ridiculous with the timeline He gave by forcing it to mean 'some of you will not die within the next week'. It also makes Christ appear ridiculous in His words when, after the transfiguration, He commanded them to tell no man about it when He Himself had spoken of it to many (disciples) a week earlier.
The significance of the transfiguration lies in the words that came from the cloud, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him". "Hear ye Him" over what was represented by Moses and Elijah, i.e., the law and the prophets. It was like the passing of the torch. It's also significant that the three Christ selected were the same three designated as 'apostles to the circumcision' [Galatians 2:9].
Answered already
You mean this?:
Yea, that's some real answer. As I said, this....:
27 But I tell you of a truth, There are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God. Lu 9
31 Even so ye also, when ye see these things coming to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh.
32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all things be accomplished. Lu 21
....does not 'fit' your view. That's the problem in a nutshell.
Last edited:
Some call it "already but not yet". I prefer "the hour cometh and now is".
There's a simple, unescapable TRUTH...
IT AINT YET HAPPENED!
Is that constructive enough?
You make Christ appear ridiculous by having Him say, some of you will see the Son of man in AD 70 when nobody saw Him then at all. You make Him out to be a fantasist or a liar. What He says, in effect, to the disciples is, "Most of you are not going to see My coming since it is far into the future, but some of you are going to do just that." And they did, and Peter tells us that He saw His 'coming.' Why won't you believe him?
The significance of the Transfiguration is that Peter, James and John saw the exalted Christ (Matthew 17:2) and saw, in small measure, the dead raised.. To be sure they also heard the Father's voice, but that had been heard previously at His baptism. Your bit about 'apostles to the circumcision is moot because Paul also saw the risen Christ (1 Cor. 9:1).
When Peter was speaking about being 'eyewitnesses of His majesty' (2 Peter 1:16), he could have talked about the Lord Jesus healing a man born blind, raising Lazarus, walking on the water, raised from the dead, but he doesn't. The Transfiguration was the most amazing thing he had seen because it was 'the power and coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.'
See above.
What things were those? 'And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and upon the earth, distress of nations in perplexity and the roaring of the surging sea. People will be fainting from fear and apprehension of the things that will happen to the world, for the powers of heaven will be shaken. And then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud, with power and great glory' (Luke 21:25-27).
Your problem in a nutshell is that none of these things happened in AD 70.
The verse, as it stands in Luke 21, would indicate that genea here stands for 'race' or 'people' (cf. Deuteronomy 32:5; Psalm 12:7; Psalm 78:6-8), and indeed they haven't. Quite simply, 'all things' were not accomplished in AD 70; nor did Christ return with 'power and great glory' in AD 70. If one compares with the parallel passages in Matthew and Mark, it becomes clear that genea can indeed refer to 'generation' and to AD 70, but that the coming of Christ comes afterwards (Mark 13:32 etc.).
The kingdom of God was revealed, small as a mustard seed (Mark 4:30-32), with the first coming of the Lord Jesus. He repeatedly refers to it as a present entity (Matthew 5:2, 20; 11:12; 12:28; 18:4). "And this Gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all nations, and then the end will come" (Matthew 24:14). It hasn't been completed yet, but the day is surely drawing close.
Just a question.
Is the church (those “in but not of the world”) not the kingdom of the Lord?
Are not believers considered “ambassadors” of the kingdom?
Why then are the statements above not exactly true, and truly fulfilled?
Certainly, some died perhaps even before Pentecost, but not all, and Christ certainly did establish His kingdom residents that point in time.
.
Please, can you explain that with Scripture references.
Good luck with that!
He admitted he didn't know that the Hypostatic Union was, and after a brief explanation he was suddenly an expert who lectured those of us who actually know and understand it, about how wrong we are.Good luck with that!
I will not do his studying for him. I gave him an excellent resource to read for himself. If he refuses to do his own research it is his loss not mine. Besides, no matter what I posted he wouldn't believe it, no matter how much scripture I supported it with.
Here. Let's see what he does with this:
Matthew 5:20; 7:21; 18:3; 18:8–9 (cf. Mark 9:43, 45, 47); 19:14 (cf. Mark 10:14–15; Luke 18:16–17); 19:16–30 (cf. Mark 10:17–31; Luke 18:18–30); 23:13; and John 3:5.
Thank you. That is exactly what's required.
That is NOT in the spirit of the OP - "a constructive brotherly discussion."
Quoting Scripture links without a main point is NOT "exactly what's required."
You're going to have to compare TCassidy's post #42 with the Scripture references he has provided, and if you don't find they match up (as I rather suspect you will), you'll have to tell him why.
I've looked at your link & some of the related Scriptures.
This link also looks helpful.
I suggest you start a new thread to discuss this specifically.
I can explain, but to do so would take several posts and you would just label them as being non-constructive. I provided a link that saves a lot of space and band width. What you do with it is up to you.
A question, please.....
Are we pretty much in agreement that "eschatology" is the study of the events surrounding the return of Jesus?
If so, then why can't those who SAY those events have already occurred, provide any credible EVIDENCE they've already occurred?
Are we pretty much in agreement that "eschatology" is the study of the events surrounding the return of Jesus?
If so, then why can't those who SAY those events have already occurred, provide any credible EVIDENCE they've already occurred?
But the PRETERIST view has been proven false by history/reality.