How does a Preterist Determine what is Metaphoric and what is Literal in Prophecy

A spiritual interpretation that puts the coming of Christ at 70 A.D. puts you in the same camp as the J.W.'s SDA's, and Harold Camping, all of whom have demonstrated that they are false prophets and under OT law would be stoned.
You have no empirical evidence that Christ came at that time. That is what is required for a person to say that Christ came at that time. Without that evidence your claim is false. Your are very fortunate that we don't live under OT law.

 

REVMAC,

It is looking at all the same verses that Premill look at.....but seeing if ,or how many have been fulfilled,and what is yet future....

In other words.....If you study the word......world ..or age....

If the word means the end of the age....the fulfillment of those verses could be speaking of the end of the jewish temple system and worship......
and the beginning of Jesus building the NT temple 1 cor 3.

So....revmac.....hold on to your 7yr tribulation, antichrist ,mark of beast,etc.for a minute or two...instead consider this.....

That Jesus was warning those first century believers about the coming judgement....and the end of the age.....The jewish age...sacrificial system,etc

That it was ending at the cross and transitioning into the NT church....The kingdom coming to earth in Jesus.

He builds His temple....the NT church......Like the shekinah glory filling the temple in 1 kings...pentecost is the Baptism of The Church as the temple of God. ezk 40-47 Joel 2-3 Isa 2 ;
2And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
3And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

4And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.


REVMAC....what if heb 12 :22-24 is the fulfillment of this?

What if this is exactly what we see in the spread of the gospel now????

I was taught that Isa.11 is the future millenial kingdom...
9They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.

10And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.


and yet Paul says this in Romans 15;

It says it is now as the gospel is preached.....not still off in the future....

Then there is always GaTell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

22For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

23But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

25For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

26But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

27For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.

28Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

29But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

30Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

31So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.
l 4;
Not earthly Jerusalem...see it???

 

A careful reading of Scripture will bear this out. To me it comes down to the fact that some simply do not want to be associated with pre-mil theology for social reasons and thus opt for a "deeper smarter understanding" of theology regardless of the lack of Biblical and historical evidence for their position.

Moses, an individual who put it all on the line for Jehovah, who led the captives free, still was not allowed into the land because of disobedience, for not taking God's word seriously. The NT could not be clearer with respect to the situation when Jesus returns but there are those who claim to be born again who think the details don't matter and that Jehovah speaks in vague generalities.

 

It seems like that doesn't it?
"I don't like that guy's theology though it may be Biblical, therefore I will make up my own no matter how outlandish it may be."

 

Not to go off on a bender, but...

Here is a question that the preterist cannot answer: How many times must a student of the Word of God read the Bible from cover to cover, or for how many years must you study the Scriptures without the use of preterist commentary before the light bulb goes on and you say "Ahh, I get it now, Jesus returned in AD 70 when the Roman army sacked Jerusalem!"

Do you have to read the Bible a minimum of 100 times cover to cover or spend 30 years study in seminary devoted to a study of Scripture? If only Jerusalem had stayed sacked, they might have a point to argue. Pity the poor dispy who thinks that Jesus will lead the troops at his return, no rather the honor goes to the heathen general Titus (according to the preterist).

 

Wouldn't a solid majority of the early Church fathers though teach this to be true, as many of them were disiplined under Apostles, or their successors?

 

They (1st generation fathers) were mostly pre-mil with respect to the return of Christ. 2 Thess ch 2 and other NT passages lay out the conditions at the time of His return. It's really simple but the preterist see no need to place historical fact next to the details of Holy Writ. They don't want to be made fun of at their covered dish dinners.

 

I am a partial preterist.....Jesus did not physically return in 70ad.....the coming was a coming in judgement upon the apostate nation of Israel.
IN mt it says the sign of the Son of man in heaven....not on earth.....
the phrase coming in the clouds was used in the OT for God coming in judgement.

Jesus physically comes again on the last day.

REVMAC......the determining factor must be scripture alone...for example


the mark on the forehead....rev 13......we have it used already in ezk9....

It was not a laser mark, or a tatoo, or a credit card...they were marked spiritually by angelic beings.....

This already happened...so why would we look for a non scriptural solution to the mark? This mark was actual in that the angelic beings could seperate the sheep from the goats...yet it was not visible and literal in the natural realm.

 

revmac....

look at Joel here.....as Peter says it was fulfilled at Pentecost;

This is already true.....acts2:16

romans 10...who calls upon the lord shall be saved.


in chapter 3
16The LORD also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake: but the LORD will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel.

17So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more.

REVMAC...this is now...the heavenly Zion and Jerusalem

pull out the concordance and look at all the prophets that speak of Zion and Jerusalem prophetically....

Ask yourself this question....could it be fulfilled now from the spiritual Zion and Jerusalem...The Lord reigning from Heaven.

I was taught that all of these verses will be fulfilled on earth in the future....then i read some men who challenged the reader to look at the verses in this other way....and it really fits..and does no damage to anything.

 

Recently someone told me that I talk too much about context. I can't help it. It is the clue to understanding Scripture. Remember that the Scriptures were written without chapter divisions. In fact the OT didn't even have the vowel markings until the Masoretes came and did that favor for us. To get a better idea of the context of this passage go a couple verses before 9:1

Then he said to me, Have you seen this, son of man? Is it a light thing to the house of Judah that they commit the abominations which they commit here? for they have filled the land with violence, and have turned again to provoke me to anger: and, behold, they put the branch to their nose. (Ezekiel 8:17)

Ezekiel is an apocalyptic book with many symbols in it. But it was written during an historical period time for a specific period. Ezekiel was writing about the sin of Judah and their consequent judgment. It was terrible and their judgment would be terrible. Chapter 8 describes their violence in no uncertain terms. If you read the chapter you will find some of the same imagery that there is in chapter nine but it is easier to understand.

Yahweh said to him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark on the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry over all the abominations that are done in the midst of it. (Ezekiel 9:4)
--There is not much difference between this and the passover before the last plague. God set a mark on those that had repented that would not receive the judgment of God. This all has to do with Judah. It was about that time, in that period of history. You cannot confuse this with the mark of the beast in Revelation chapter 13.

This chapter is about God's mark.
Rev.13 is about the mark of the beast, Satan's mark.
Rev. 7 God seals 144,000 Jews, 7,000 from each tribe. That doesn't happen here either.
All three of the above events differ greatly from each other and cannot be confused.

 

DHK...
Thanks for your response. I was taught the premillenial system first. I know the teaching about the mark of the beast....and you are correct with context,and chapter divisions.....so with that in mind ...go a little further to rev 14...

 

The Bible doesn't say what it looks like and neither did I. But that doesn't make the two events the same.
Imagery is similar because both books are apocalyptic in nature.
Language is similar because the subject is judgment in both situations.
However, the context, the situation, the history, are all different. The marks or seals are entirely different used for different purposes at different times in history.

The apostles don't ALWAYS refer to the OT. Sometimes they refer to the words of Jesus, occasionally to apocryphal literature. Paul quoted a Greek Poet, a Cretian philosopher, etc. Not everything is related to the OT. The NT doesn't refer to this passage.

This did not happen yet has it. Judah and Israel did not come together to seek the Lord; they came together to crucify Christ!! In no way did Israel seek the Lord in the first century. The times of the Gentiles are still here. The passage that you are considering is still future.

 

Some see it happening right here:Isa49

verse 8 quoted in 2cor 6;
Corinthians 6

1We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.

2(For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)

Why do you think the Holy Spirit brought this to Pauls mind?

DHK.....I know you and revmac hold the classic position..... I am not asking this so much to quiz you on it....i am trying to show that a solid biblical case can be made using these verses as offered.
I remember the first time I met a solid amill believer I kept telling him...bob how can you not see this....as i would quote fromZech 14 or jer 30:7 or dan 9;24-27 or 1thess4 ......and he kept saying i like all those verses also???
I remember praying for him,lol.....he was okay as he was...he looked for and believed in a literal second coming....just had a different calendar,and understanding of the nature of the Kingdom .
I think both you and revmac...offer a solid premill posistion and you are trying to be faithful.
I am still studying post/and amill.... more with a view to understand the Kingdom as seperate from the church...how much they blend together, what are we to do now in the kingdom, and what is unique to the church.

 

The way you dissect the Bible is terrible.
Read past verse 8.
Has this happened yet?

They shall not hunger nor thirst; neither shall the heat nor sun smite them: for he that hath mercy on them shall lead them, even by the springs of water shall he guide them. And I will make all my mountains a way, and my highways shall be exalted. Behold, these shall come from far: and, lo, these from the north and from the west; and these from the land of Sinim. (Isaiah 49:10-12)

Has Israel come to the place where they will never hunger, never thirst, where the heat or sun will never smite them or make them uncomfortable, etc. Has that ever happened in history? I think you know the answer. You are taking Scripture out of its context once again. The Scripture describes a time which is yet future, a time when Christ will come again, and lift the curse from off this world.

 

DHK,

I think this has happened at the cross for the Israel of God.
Jesus told the woman at the well those who come to Him will never thirst.
Sinim is China....they worship Jesus there also.
Isa.49 describes and sums up the Servant of the Lords work..as an individual and as head of the new spiritual nation. I would not dis miss it so fast.

The Ot shadows and types were imperfect...yet we are told that all these things were written for us,upon whom the end of the age has come.

 

It doesn't really matter what you think here.
I ask again:

Has Israel come to the place where they will never hunger, never thirst, where the heat or sun will never smite them or make them uncomfortable, etc. Has that ever happened in history?

 

DHK,

Ok ...let me say it like this.

It has happened at the cross for all the elect,,,,the Israel of God.

You do not see it...because your false dispensational ideas,seperating Israel and the church after God makes them one new man you will never see it correctly as long as you divide what God has joined together.

The other day you gave an good explanation to Winman...about his error on Rom 7:9......which he promptly rejected a few posts later.
His rejection of that truth will not allow him to have a corect understanding of what he clearly misses.

In the same way.... these verses teach what they do and they teach it despite the false dispensational ideas believed by some.
If you continue holding what you hold...you will not see this either, because you will explain it away as a parenthesis.....before God gets back to physical apostate Israel.

DHK.....I am pretty sure you are not looking to change what you hold to...was just trying to show how others view the verses. You have a different view....held by many....but wrong.

 

Look at the question again:
Has Israel come to the place where they will never hunger, never thirst, where the heat or sun will never smite them or make them uncomfortable, etc. Has that ever happened in history?

Now explain to me in history (give dates, times, places, etc.), where Israel has never hungered or thirsted. They crucified Christ and forty years later their city and their temple was destroyed, and they were scattered over the face of the earth. In WWII they faced the horrible holocaust of Hitler, the very opposite of the teaching given in that verse. The goal of the Arab nations even now, is wipe them off of the map, shove them into the sea and get rid of them completely. All of this completely contradicts this verse and the promises that are made in the chapter you are quoting. I am not wrong. You are wrong; very wrong.

My view of Scripture is not wrong. I have just pointed out how you have a very biased and distorted view of Scripture that it doesn't even make sense.

They teach two things:
1. That judgment was coming on Judah at that time in history.
2. That there would be a future blessing on Israel (both Israel and Judah combined), which has not happened yet. It would happen when there is a temple, when they are one nation, and the blessings would be great. That has not happened yet. I would rather believe the Bible then your imaginations. Speculations and philosophy are not for me. I stick to the Word of God.

It is not wrong. My view is Biblical.
Your view is founded on unbiblical speculation. That is all it is--speculation. There is no empirical evidence that Christ ever returned in 70 A.D. That makes the preterist as much as a false prophet as Ellen G. White or at the very least as Harold Camping. I don't want to be associated with either.