Sure you did.
Funnier than Ed and prophecynut?
Thats why your here, right?
Yes, Spurgeon, Gill, Owen, Jonathan Edwards................all cultist.
But DD , Ed, Van Impe, Hal Lindsey...........all theologians.
-
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!
Preterism v. God's Plan for our future
- Thread starter Ed Edwards
- Start date
But DD , Ed, Van Impe, Hal Lindsey...........all theologians.
prophecynut
New Member
ED
Agree with the 5 resurrections except for No. 3.
Consider my imput.
1. Amen
2. You might add Mt. 27:52
3. 1 Cor. 15:23 - "But each in his own turn: Christ, the first fruits; then when he comes (the rapture), those who belong to him."
Those who belong to him have been saved by Grace alone, beginning with Pentecost and ending with the Church age or dispensation of grace. They are indwelled with the Holy Spirit, in Christ and taken into his body of believers. These
attributes are unique to the Church saints and not the OT saints or Trib saints.
The Judgement Seat of Christ (Rom. 14:10; 2 Cor. 5:10) is reserved solely for those in Christ and not the saints from another dispensation or saints under the law as the OT and Trib saints are.
To me, it's unlikely God would resurrect both at the same time. OT saints do not have a personal relationship with Christ and are not his disciples.
4. Amen (+ Trib saints)
5. Amen
Agree with the 5 resurrections except for No. 3.
Consider my imput.
1. Amen
2. You might add Mt. 27:52
3. 1 Cor. 15:23 - "But each in his own turn: Christ, the first fruits; then when he comes (the rapture), those who belong to him."
Those who belong to him have been saved by Grace alone, beginning with Pentecost and ending with the Church age or dispensation of grace. They are indwelled with the Holy Spirit, in Christ and taken into his body of believers. These
attributes are unique to the Church saints and not the OT saints or Trib saints.
The Judgement Seat of Christ (Rom. 14:10; 2 Cor. 5:10) is reserved solely for those in Christ and not the saints from another dispensation or saints under the law as the OT and Trib saints are.
To me, it's unlikely God would resurrect both at the same time. OT saints do not have a personal relationship with Christ and are not his disciples.
4. Amen (+ Trib saints)
5. Amen
prophecynut
New Member
goodie, goodie a test, do I get a 100%
religion
What kind of Jew will fulfill your eschatological view?
Descendants of Jacob, the 12 tribes.
Tom Arnold is a Jewish convert, does he?
Nope.
How about all those living in Israel who are the descendants of Jewish converts from the 900sAD?
Nope, those are Khazar Jews.
Sorry for butting in ED, I could not resist the temptation.
What is a Jew Ed? Race or religion?
religion
What kind of Jew will fulfill your eschatological view?
Descendants of Jacob, the 12 tribes.
Tom Arnold is a Jewish convert, does he?
Nope.
How about all those living in Israel who are the descendants of Jewish converts from the 900sAD?
Nope, those are Khazar Jews.
Sorry for butting in ED, I could not resist the temptation.
Daniel David
New Member
grasshopper, consider the following from the spurgeon webpage:
Spurgeon on eschatology (Hint: Spurgeon was premillenial).
Jonathan Edwards was a postmillenialist.
Gill was a covenantalist.
I am not familiar enough with Owen yet.
Listen, I have publicly stated that I want nothing to do with LaHaye, Lindsay, or even Ed's belief.
Spurgeon on eschatology (Hint: Spurgeon was premillenial).
Jonathan Edwards was a postmillenialist.
Gill was a covenantalist.
I am not familiar enough with Owen yet.
Listen, I have publicly stated that I want nothing to do with LaHaye, Lindsay, or even Ed's belief.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
No problem.
It is hard to have a discussion with
someone who comes against every thing
you say. It is hard to talk with someone
who doesn't use Graemlins. If i say
"I'm against STD (sexually transmitted
disease)" will he say he is for it?
It seems if we just go by the odds, that
he and i would agree on something.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Amen, Brother Daniel
David -- Preach it!
If you taught just like LaHaye, one of you
would be redundant.
Ed: ----------------------------------
BTW, i challenge any of you to give
an evangelistic message featuring your
eschatological belief as i did above
for my pretribulation rapture,
premillinnial Second Advent of Jesus,
Futurist eschatology.
--------------------------------------
Grasshopper: "I have done this using scripture.
Either your memory is failing
or you just choose to ignore it."
You are correct.
I rephrase:
----------------------------------
BTW, i challenge any of you (save
for Grasshopper) to give
an evangelistic message featuring your
eschatological belief as i did above
for my pretribulation rapture,
premillinnial Second Advent of Jesus,
Futurist eschatology.
--------------------------------------
2 Peter 3:8---------------------------------------------
8 Dear friends, don't let this one thing escape you:
with the Lord one day is like 1,000 years, and 1,000 years
like one day.
------------------------------------------------------------
Grasshopper: "So the 1000 year Kingdom age might just be 1 day.
And Genesis might be speaking of a 7000 year creation. etc...."
You should feel free to read scripture any way you wish.
Grasshopper: "Heb 10:37 says For yet a little while and He who
is coming will come and will not tarry ."
Please quote in context, it makes your assumed meaning
of none effect:
Hebrews 10:36-37 (HCSB):
For you need endurance,
so that after you have done God's will,
you may receive what was promised.
37. For in yet a very little while, the Coming One
will come and not delay.
Daniel spake of weeks, of what importance is a couple of days?
Ed:------------------------------------------------
Preterism says: The prophecies of the Bible were
all fulfilled before the fathers fell asleep.
---------------------------------------------------
Grasshopper: "Again you show your ignorance of preterism.
The fathers are speaking of OT saints.
Once again, you are correct. I am totally ignorant of preterism.
But that COULD BE that nobody every explained it RATIONALLY to me.
And chances are, people who say: "Where
is the promise of His coming?
For ever since the fathers fell asleep,
all things continue as they have been
since the beginning of creation."
are much more clear on what it means than i would be.
Prophecynut: "Those who belong to him have been saved
by Grace alone, beginning with Pentecost and ending
with the Church age or dispensation of grace."
I politely disagree. In every dispensation those who
believe in God are saved by Grace alone. Grace
borne salvation is not limited to the Church Age alone.
Read some of their commentaries regarding eschatology.
Your views on most matters of eschatology seem closer to Lahaye and Ed than Spurgeon and Gill.
Read Spurgeon, Gill, or Matthew Henry on Matt. 24:21. I think you will find they also take the "pathetic" view.
All take a preteristic approach to the Olivet Discourse. Preterist are divided onto 2 camps: partial and full. All those above would be partial. They understand the OD to be concerned with "a" coming but not "the final coming". Like any other group there are differences among preterist.
prophecynut
New Member
Quoting ED "Grace born salvation is not limited to the Church Age alone."
Dispensation of Grace same as Dispensation of the Church. OT saints weren't save by grace alone, they were required to obey the Law.
John 1:13 - born of God
John 3:3 - born again
John 3:8 - born of the spirit
1 Pet. 1:23 - born again
Being born of God, born again or of the spirit never appears in the OT or Rev. What does that tell you ED?
Dispensation of Grace same as Dispensation of the Church. OT saints weren't save by grace alone, they were required to obey the Law.
John 1:13 - born of God
John 3:3 - born again
John 3:8 - born of the spirit
1 Pet. 1:23 - born again
Being born of God, born again or of the spirit never appears in the OT or Rev. What does that tell you ED?
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Prophecynut: "Being born of God, born again or of the spirit never appears in the OT or Rev. What does that tell you ED?"
That being born again of the spirit was
a mystery: not revealed in the OT and
revealed in the NT through Messiah Yeshua.
That being born again of the spirit was
a mystery: not revealed in the OT and
revealed in the NT through Messiah Yeshua.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Grasshopper: "Like any other group there are differences among preterist."
Amen, Brother GRasshopper -- Preach it!
If you want to hear six different eschatologycal theories,
ask five preterists
Amen, Brother GRasshopper -- Preach it!
If you want to hear six different eschatologycal theories,
ask five preterists
prophecynut
New Member
The Church is the only group of saints indwelled with the Holy Spirit. The body of a Church saint is a temple where the Holy Spirit lives.
Do you know of any OT scriptures where the Holy Spirit dwells forever in the saint and their bodies are called temples of God's Spirit?
KenH
Well-Known Member
Not taking sides, but maybe this will help you(I found it to be interesting) -
www.preteristcentral.com/what-is-preterism.htm .
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Brother Prophecynut:
We seem to be in agreement.
I was only trying to show that the dispensations
were actualy the same form of salvation. God
doesn't change, people do.
Meanwhile, while we are spliting hares,
the 2 Peter 3 problem remains unaddressed.
The whole reason for teaching any eschatology
is to enhanse the serve of the Christian
(clear to me from 2 Peter 3). Even an error
eschatology, if it achieves the generic
purpose of any eschatology, does good.
We seem to be in agreement.
I was only trying to show that the dispensations
were actualy the same form of salvation. God
doesn't change, people do.
Meanwhile, while we are spliting hares,
the 2 Peter 3 problem remains unaddressed.
The whole reason for teaching any eschatology
is to enhanse the serve of the Christian
(clear to me from 2 Peter 3). Even an error
eschatology, if it achieves the generic
purpose of any eschatology, does good.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Thank you KenH.
What i read of preteristism
drys like a cloud without rain
2Peter 3:15 (HCSB):
Also, regard the patience of our Lord
as an opportunity for salvation,
just as our dear brother Paul,
according to the wisdom given to him,
has written to you.
I understand how a futurist can do this.
I don't understand how a preterist can
do this.
What i read of preteristism
drys like a cloud without rain
2Peter 3:15 (HCSB):
Also, regard the patience of our Lord
as an opportunity for salvation,
just as our dear brother Paul,
according to the wisdom given to him,
has written to you.
I understand how a futurist can do this.
I don't understand how a preterist can
do this.
Daniel David
New Member
Grasshopper, I tire of the debate really, but I would like to point out that just about EVERY dispensationalist I know of believe the O.D. has reference to the destruction of Jerusalem. Perhaps you don't get that.
I must not get it. You have been telling me those interpretations are "pathetic". So now you agree Matt 24 is fulfilled.
Daniel David
New Member
Not fulfilled grasshopper.
For example, Christ makes a break in Luke 21 between the armies surrounding Israel and the end of the age. I think it is around verse 25 or 26.
So the destruction of Jerusalem does answer one of the questions.
For example, Christ makes a break in Luke 21 between the armies surrounding Israel and the end of the age. I think it is around verse 25 or 26.
So the destruction of Jerusalem does answer one of the questions.
Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
I don't see any indication that Jesus has changed subjects.
Mark 13:1 And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!
2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately,
4 Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?
Only one subject in mind.
Mark also puts the Abomination of Desolation at the time of the fall of Jerusalem:
14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains: 15 And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house:
If you notice Luke puts the fleeing to the Mountains BEFORE the supposed transition verse of 25 or 26:
Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
And as you saw Mark put the Abomination of Desolation at that same time.
Luke also in Chapter 17 puts it at the time when the Son of Man is revealed:
Luke 17:24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day. 25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.
26 And as it was in the days of Noe , so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot ; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed .
31 In that day , he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.
Many dispies and partial prets say Matt.24 transitions from the fall of Jerusalem to the future coming at verse 35 or 36;
Matt 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
But again there is no indication of a change of subject. Also he uses the reference to Noah AFTER the supposed transition verse. But Luke uses the reference to Noah at the destruction of Jerusalem.
It seems to me that either the Olivet Discourse is all future or all past. If you carefully study Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 17, and Luke 21, I think you will see there are major problems in trying to divide it between the events of AD70 and a future event some 2000 years later. This is one of the major reasons I accept the full-preterist veiw as opposed to the partial-preterist view.
In reading the works of both futurist and partial-prets they all seem to acknowledge the difficulty of dividing the Discourse.
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Mark 13:14 (KJV1769):
But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation,
spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where
it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,)
then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:
In 67-70AD the wise Christians left for the mountains
BEFORE the armies arrived. After the armies arrived
was TOO late to flee to the hills.
In the FUTURE, 3½-years after the Antichrist is
seen, he will go into the restored Temple in
Jerusalem and commit the AOD. A miracle of GOd
will transport the believing Jews to the mountains.
But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation,
spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where
it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,)
then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:
In 67-70AD the wise Christians left for the mountains
BEFORE the armies arrived. After the armies arrived
was TOO late to flee to the hills.
In the FUTURE, 3½-years after the Antichrist is
seen, he will go into the restored Temple in
Jerusalem and commit the AOD. A miracle of GOd
will transport the believing Jews to the mountains.
1.Glad you've come around to the fact that those passages speak of AD66-70. You have come along way.
2.What good will it do if God transports those to the mountains? I've been told by futurist that this speaks of a WORLD-WIDE judgement. So it doesn't matter where you flee to.