Featured Fake Eschatology, continued from previous thread

Funny, that is exactly what I think of "futurist" views of eschatology. Presuppositions are built into the views of those who follow this view, clouding what should be a clear interpretation.

What you see as several dispensations I see as different eras. We have two dispensations - the old covenant and the new one.

 

Not so many years ago, I was in complete agreement with you. Fortunately for all of us, our views on eschatology do not affect our salvation.

 

Not to speak for @kyredneck, but you do realize we have answered your questions many times. It's okay that you disagree with our views, but you keep acting as if we had never answered your questions. The fact that you disagree doesn't mean we can't or haven't answered these questions.

 

This generation means millennia later.
Soon means millennia later.
Quickly means millennia later.


He’s straightjacketed by his futurism.

 

So much for interpreting Scripture literally

 

The point is that they're all 'entities', not individuals.

The 'man' of Ephesians 2:15 has been 'known' since the writing. It's us, the Israel of God, comprised of Jew and Gentile where neither circumcision nor uncircumsion means anything.

'The Woman' of Revelation 12 is the heavenly Jerusalem, the same woman of Genesis 3:15; Psalms 87; Isaiah 54; Galatians 4:26, represented by ALL her children in this temporal realm.

'The other woman' of Revelation, the earthly Jerusalem, is "the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified". "And in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints, and of all that have been slain upon the earth".

Certainly history runs in spirals, forever repeating itself:

9 That which hath been is that which shall be; and that which hath been done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Ecc 1

...and names, faces, and places, change, BUT, there's been only one violent consummation of the Sinai covenant of condemnation and death.

Yea, it'd help if you gave the passage. 'Sea'' is often symbolic of 'the Nations' in the scriptures.

That's a matter of opinion, imo, Satan has been bound and loosed already and 'the camp of the Saints' is being surrounded by her enemies, now, today.

The seventh head was the 'Holy Roman Empire' comprised of the Germanic tribes. Rome was first ruled by the Caesars and then by the Germanic tribes. These are also the ten horns of the seventh head of Revelation and the ten horns of the fourth beast of Daniel.

These ten kings of the seventh head were to make war with the Lamb [the Church]. We, as Baptists, are acutely aware of the persecutions the Church suffered at the hands of the Holy Roman Empire (RCC). The ten kings of the seventh head were also to hate the Harlot [the dispersed Jews], eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. Herein lies the realization of the punishments and curses outlined in Lev 26 & Dt 28 (etc.) on the Jews for not hearkening unto the voice of Jehovah, i.e., the persecutions, pogroms, expulsions, etc, that the Jews have experienced down through the last two millennia.

The eighth, "the beast that was, and is not, is himself also an eighth, and is of the seven", the dragon, that old serpent, was the controlling force behind all the heads.

 

I can appreciate the humor with being 73 and not looking a day over 80, and will borrow that at some point.

On to serious topics, though. Whether you think our answers are correct or not, you keep saying that we can't answer. The point is that we have answered. To interpret a symbolic passage as being literal is just as wrong as trying to interpret a literal passage as symbolic. This is not a matter of reducing any passage, but of "rightly dividing the word".

Yes, Jesus is spiritually present whenever two or more are gathered in His name. I think that even applies over a forum such as this one. That doesn't mean that He didn't "come" in judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70.

I don't believe a 3rd temple will ever be built in Jerusalem. Neither do I believe the Beast will rise to power, as that happened long ago. Having said that, I am watching for the return of the Lord, even as you are.

 

Amen! Still think full blown preterism is heresy though!

 

When Jesus has the actual Second Coming, history as we now know it ends, and that did not happen AD 70!

 

While Jesus wasn't seen, His judgment was clearly seen in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple.

Without a future 3rd temple, the AOD happened when the Roman army desecrated the Herodian temple.

A new temple would be required for your version of prophecy to be fulfilled. History shows these events came to pass long ago. Regarding the microchip technology, I agree that this is a cause for concern because we can't trust the government. For that reason alone, my family would not agree to such implants. If they were implanted without our knowledge or consent, I don't see how anyone could be held accountable for something beyond our control. But I digress. Time will show which view of eschatology is truly Make Believe.

 

Glad to hear the word rapture! In which the Lord Jesus invites us to...

Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. - Matthew 24:42

 

Exactly! That is the same thing.

With all due respect, Josephus and others have provided the evidence.

There will not be a rapture. I have learned much from Gentry, DeMar, and other Preterists, but I've also followed the Bereans' example and studied whether those things that these men teach are so. Also following the Bereans' example in my studies, I've come to realize that the futurists interpretations of eschatology are seriously flawed.

 

Please, one reference.

 

Here is a link with his history of the first Jewish revolt against Rome - The Chronology of the First Jewish Revolt According to Josephus. Section 7 (at the bottom) is very specific about the siege and destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

 

No one is speaking about full preterism except Astericktom,but he speaks and answers on his own threads. Why did you bring that into this discussion?