Featured Let Jesus be Jesus and Preterism Rings and Reigns all through the Bible

Of course he became invisible when he got out of their sight, sheesh, and he will be invisible until he gets into a place where he may be seen. That has nothing to do with my point that he is coming back to the same place. This same Jesus means in the same form. You have told me nothing to dissuade my views.

And Zechariah, as did a lot of O.T. prophets, mixed things happening in their day with prophecy. It was very common. The Mount of Olives is still standing, so it is a future event. If it were symbolic language, the scripture would have said something like, "it was as if the mountain split in half", or something of the sort. Sheesh.

 

ταχύ
tachu
takh-oo'
Neuter singular of G5036 (as adverb); shortly, that is, without delay, soon, or (by surprise) suddenly, or (by implication of ease) readily: - lightly, quickly.


This is only part of the evidence that answers your contention, the definition of ταχύ - a word that is not even in your Cor. verse.

You also ignore the other verses that speak of soonness like the opening verses of Rev., words from Christ himself.

So, yes, Christ did say He was coming soon.

 

You missed my point entirely. I even put it in red. It is not about Christ's form, but about how He would come.

I have told you nothing because you have (apparently) read nothing of my main point.

You are just making this up. Scripture never uses that language. Instead it gives us many figurative images that we - through study and constant exposure to this form of writing - come to understand as figurative.

Two common features of those who oppose a Preterist interpretation of Acts 1:11 are:
1. Ignoring of the cloud - even though it is a necessary component of the evidence, found in almost all other coming/apocalyptic passages.
2. Mistaking the focus of the prophecy. It is all about how Christ was to return - "in like manner" -, not in the form He would take.

 

You have to compare Rev 3:11 and other verses where Jesus said he is coming quickly to determine the correct meaning of this word.

Mat 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Jesus taught that he would come in an abrupt, sudden moment, like a flash of lightning.

Mat 24:42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.

Jesus taught that he will come suddenly when a person least expects it.

Mat 25:10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.
11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.
13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

Jesus did not say whether he would come soon or delay, but stressed that a person must always be ready, because he comes suddenly, and there is no time to repent. The oil represents the Holy Spirit. The wise virgins believed and had the Spirit, they had oil. While the foolish virgins went to buy oil, the bridegroom came suddenly, and they were refused entry.

Mat 24:48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;
50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,

Here Jesus implies there could be a delay, and that the evil servant would beat his fellowservants, and eat and drink with drunkards, and that Jesus would return when he was unawares.

Mat 25:14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.
15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.
16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.
17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.
18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.
19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.

Here, Jesus actually said "after a LONG TIME the lord of those servants cometh".

So Jesus is not saying he will come soon, he in fact implies that it will be a long time, but that he is coming suddenly when we least expect it.

 

No sense in my continuing here with you, Winman. You keep ignoring my previous points, so why should I bring up more? Or answer yours?

Take care.

 

See how easy that is folks, just stick them with the word of God.

 

Umm. Now, that is exactly my point. I gave the Word as my evidence - and you ignored it. Quit beating your chest like a teenager. It is unbecoming.

I don't at all doubt the passages that you quoted. I doubt the connections between those passages that come from Winman's mind. I could just as easily cut-and-paste twenty times as many verses as you, and then claim you were ignoring the Word of God.

My passage that I referred to was Rev. 1

"Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
Rev 1:2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
Rev 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand."

The first underlined phrase employs ---, a term that you did not do justice to. The second underlined phrase uses the term ἐγγύς.

eggus
eng-goos'
From a primary verb ἄγχω agchō (to squeeze or throttle; akin to the base of G43); near (literally or figuratively, of place or time): - from, at hand, near, nigh (at hand, unto), ready. - Strong's


This is a very good topic to discuss further, but not with you, Winman. At least not when in you are in your current chest-beating mode.

Decide which you want, intelligent and mutually-respectful discussion - or grandstanding bluster.

 

What would there be to discuss? I believe that Revelation was written well after 70 A.D.. That is what most scholars teach, and I have no reason to doubt them. You will argue Revelation was written before 70 A.D..

I have already posted scripture from Zechariah that did not happen in 70 A.D.. When the Lord returns it will be to fight against the nations that come against Israel. Jesus will deliver the Jews, not destroy them. We had Logos make the ridiculous argument that Jesus actually fought with the Romans, based on one version of scripture only (Darby). All other versions agree with the KJB which is the only version I read. Jesus will destroy these nations that come against Israel and save it. This did not happen in 70 A.D..

 

Now you are changing the topic. And still avoiding my point. I had hoped for better from you.

OK. Moving on...

 

Logos: I am finished with this...I knew better than to post to begin with after the second or third response you gave....so, it's partially my fault. Most people on this board seem to have the wisdom to have ignored your thread altogether...and I now see their wisdom in having done so. You are apparently permitted somehow to continuously call others "blasphemers" and for no reason whatsoever. I cannot fathom how you are permitted to do this, and moreover, how you seem to have no problem with your actions whatsoever. It legitimately does not seem to bother you one whit that you speak needlessly like that to people, that is not a word to throw around willy-nilly as you do. I should have known better than to keep responding to you, I really don't blame you, you are vicious as a snake; and I should have realized that from the get-go. I blame myself. Take care of yourself.

 

Logos1, your assertions are judgemental and ludicrous.

There are many fine Christians on both side of this issue, yet you say those not on your side are blasphemous. You will face those words one day, I would be careful. What goes around comes around. So all the great preachers down thru the years, many of them way more spiritual and scholarly than you, and were used by God, I might add, are guilty of blasphemy? I think not. Jesus rebuked his disciples for thoughts like that, and if you haven't been rebuked, maybe you should check up and see just how much you are walking in the Spirit, no offense.

If a thousand years are as a day with the Lord, how is 2000 years not soon?

2 Peter 3:3-9 (HCSB)
3 First, be aware of this: Scoffers will come in the last days to scoff, living according to their own desires,
4 saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? Ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they have been since the beginning of creation.”
5 They willfully ignore this: Long ago the heavens and the earth were brought about from water and through water by the word of God.
6 Through these waters the world of that time perished when it was flooded.
7 But by the same word, the present heavens and earth are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
8 Dear friends, don’t let this one thing escape you: With the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.
9 The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance.

Furthermore, I have asked for the scripture that proves Christ came back already, specifically in A.D. 70 as your ilk asserts, but I have read none. Now maybe I missed it, but I ask you again: where is the scripture? Also, why didn't John tell us about Jesus coming again in A.D. 70 in the book of the Revelation? It was more than likely written after A.D. 90, yet John tells us about the things that WILL come to pass, which includes, btw, the coming of Christ.

Finally, I am not saying there are not problems with any eschatological view, and there are with dispensationalism as well. But don't be so smug as to think that you have it all figured out, and everyone else is blasphemous. That is utterly ludicrous.

 

This is where I come from too....it is fine (even admirable in a weird way) to be utterly conviced and confident of a debateable Theological position....but dismissive (against the Godly witness of some VERY admirable men who are gifted with the Word)...is short-sighted at least. I have no problem, although I disagree vehemently, with "Pre-terism", but to then call all adherents of an alternative P.O.V. ..."Blasphemers" is to miss the fundamentals of Scripture and it's Spirit IMO. I am not a Calvinist for instance (Tom is) I am not a Preterist either (Tom is), but I appreciate and respect his opinion on issues, and can only be strengthened by them.

To throw around the term "blasphemer" willy-nilly as he does, is worthy of reproof at minimum...it is Satanic, and accusatory of the brethren at worst...I sincerely wish that others of his Theological bent would back us up on this...it would increase my confidence in them immensely. They should, on some level, "police their own"...we can't do it for them.

Yes...all Eschatalogical views leave questions...we see through a glass darkly, and do not understand all things. And while a certain level of confidence may be admirable, to call all non-adherents "blasphemers" by default is not in the Spirit of Christian Love or Unity or Exhortation whatsoever.

 

Well said, brother. I am a Calvinist, but not fatalistic. One preacher put it succinctly, "what we call free will, God calls election. "

 

All depends WHICH pretierism is held, as partial has been allowed/seen as being a viable option, but Hyper/full version ALWYS seen as being outside 'bounds of orthodoxy", and NOT to be held!

 

Are you another like me, in the ole "Sotierology calvinistic/eschatology is Dispy?"