Preterists Cannot Prove Their Assertions !

[Lodic]

There's only one way to "interpret" most Scripture - AS WRITTEN in the ancient mss.



You're right; we won't agree cuz it DIDN'T happen then. That time was the "days of vengeance" jesus prophesied against the Jews. There have been far-greater disasters since then, such as the nazi holocaust against the Jews.



Then, you should alse agree that partial preterism is false, as Jesus said there'd be a great cosmological disturbance IMMEDIATELY AFTER the great trib(Matt. 24:29-30) during which He shall return.


And preterism is wholly MAN-MADE.



Both sides have people in it for the money.

All Scripture must be interpreted according to its "literal" sense, whether it's historical narrative, didactic, poetic, or prophetic symbolism. To re-state the obvious, we will never agree. It's the "futurist" view that is made up by man; preterism is the orthodox view.

 

[Lodic]

Daniel, Paul, and JESUS all spoke of a MAN who will be the 'beast'. I proved that Nero was NOT the beast. That man is yet to come upon the world stage, if he's even been born yet. So, we know he will be a LITERAL man.

The context of the Scripture should showya that the marka the beast will be literal, as no one may buy or sell without it. Buying/selling are not supernatural processes. I believe that mark will be some sorta microchip. The tech for such now exists. As for God's mark upon His servants, it will be real, & it may or may not be visible to other men. (Remember, God set some kinda mark on Cain, so he wouldn't be killed when he entered a town new to him.)

Gary DeMar is an extremist with some rather-heterodox views, who's on my "Clowns" list.

There's simply NO VALID REASON to believe the marka the beast won't be literal. As for believing it's already come & gone, that's nonsense.

If you really could "prove" your point regarding the "futurist" view of the Beast, etc., I'd switch back to that view. As it is, I see more proof to support the preterist view.

The true context of Scripture shows there was / will be no literal mark. I used to believe the mark of the beast would be a microchip, but I have dismissed that as science-fiction. Good point regarding the mark of Cain, but I'm not about the nature of his mark. Maybe a topic for discussion sometime.

Gary DeMar is a brilliant theologian, as are Ken Gentry and the late R.C. Sproul. I am quite sure the Scriptures are your ultimate source, and I assure you they are mine. We just disagree on what they say.

 

[Lodic]

Then, you SHOULD! You haven't presented one bit of credible evidence supporting it. But at least you're staying away from the obviously-goofy stuff such as "Josephus saw/heard chariots in the sky above Jerusalem."

I'm still getting used to the Baptist Board, and hit reply too soon instead of just grabbing some quotes to reply to. I am changing comments to italics, and mine to bold to help distinguish them.
Since I AM fully convinced that the "futurist" view is wrong, it would be wrong for me to rejoin that "camp" just because it's the popular view. I had heard something about Josephus and chariots above Jerusalem, but I don't really believe it. Then again, I've never read Josephus for myself.

I don't see how anyone who has any knowledge of ancient world history could be convinced that preterism is truthful! There's not one quark of EVIDENCE supporting it!

OTOH, I find it odd that someone such as yourself, who does have a lot of knowledge of the ancient world, could fail to see the evidence of preterism.

You're acting in typical pret fashion. When asked about such things as the marka the beast, etc. you retreat into the shell of "Those Scriptures are SYMBOLIC!" Well, it WON'T WORK!

We see Jesus' prophecies that HAVE already been fulfilled as being fulfilled LITERALLY, TO-THE-LETTER, and not just the Olivet Discourse. Jesus prophesied about his own death, saying it'd be by crucifixion, that all His disciples would temporarily desert Him, , etc. etc.

And again, the LITERAL fulfillment so far of the Olivet Discourse is most-telling! No one can truthfully deny the FACTS posted in the OP of this thread. There's simply NO CREDIBLE REASON to believe the fulfillment of the remainder won't be JUST-AS-LITERAL as the already-accomplished fulfillments.

I'll take the comments about me acting in a "typical pret fashion" as a compliment. However, we don't retreat into a shell of "symbolism" any more or less than futurists retreat into a shell of "literal fulfillment".

Sorry, but preterism is built upon a man-made foundation of hot air. Scripture & history prove it false. I have asked you to provide **PROOF/EVIDENCE/DOCUMENTATION** that the events prets SAY have already occurred, HAVE actually already occurred, and you've come up EMPTY, still trying to reduce Scriptures that are inconvenient to the pret view to "symbolic" status.WHY ARE YOU TRYING TO FOOL YOURSELF??????????????????????????

The futurist view is man-made, and modern Christians have gone for it hook, line, and sinker. As I've said before, this comes down to interpretation. You will never see proof of things that will never literally happen.

This reminds me about a story of Hermann Goering during WW2. Goering told the German people that "if one enemy bomb falls upon Germany, you can call me Meyer."(an insult to Germans of that time) Shortly after he said that, the British bombed a german city; in that fight, some british planes were shot down. Some soldiers had Goering come & inspect the remains of one plane, which was very-obviously British. Goering made all sorts of excuses, and finally issued an "executive order" that this plane was NOT British, & NO British bombs fell upon Germany! That's what preterism reminds me of; A DENIAL OF REALITY!

Good story. I was watching a John Wayne movie recently, and a line caught my attention. A sheriff had a hot-headed deputy who was in a big hurry to make a big mistake. The sheriff told his deputy "the problem with you is that you're like an owl. The more light you shine on him, the less you see." Seems to fit in this case.

Stay tuned for the coming "Your Hero Nero" thread!

Oops. I accidentally put all my responses in the text of your original message. You will need to expand the thread above to see them.

Looking forward to the "Nero" thread. FYI - I'm only on the Baptist Board during the week, so I may not reply right away after it's posted.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

It's the "futurist" view that is made up by man; preterism is the orthodox view.

Well you would say that, wouldn't you? But in fact. one does not have to be either a Preterist or a Futurist.

 

[Lodic]

You disappoint me. You have been so nice up to now and then this arrogance.

Hi, Rev. I've been trying to get your meaning about what my "defense of scripture" is. All I can come up with is what all Christians should use as their defense of scripture - prayer for clear revelation of God's Word as we study. I'm sure that is what you do, and I assure you that is what I do. Having said that, how do you see my comment as arrogant?

 

[Lodic]

Well you would say that, wouldn't you? But in fact. one does not have to be either a Preterist or a Futurist.

Are you referring to those who view all prophecies as symbolic or allegorical?

 

[David Kent]

part of why I don't use the KJV too much.

Mark 13;19, NIV - because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again.

If you quote from the NIV perversion, we can't take you seriously. We don't anyway. You follow the false Jesuit futurist fable, and you can't proved it happened because it hasn't so it all speculation.

 

[David Kent]

Then, you should alse agree that partial preterism is false, as Jesus said there'd be a great cosmological disturbance IMMEDIATELY AFTER the great trib(Matt. 24:29-30) during which He shall return.

As I said that is nonesense. Sun moon and stars in scripture prophecy always refer to people.

 

[Covenanter]

Preterists Cannot Prove Their Assertions !

We have shown from Scripture the truth of the "partial Preterist" understanding of Scripture.

I hope watchers have been edified & encouraged.

 

[David Kent]

Futurists Cannot Prove Their Assertions.

 

[Yeshua1]

Ezekiel was prophesying during the exile to those who had lost land, city and temple.

The prophecy was fulfilled for its hearers by the return. The perfect fulfilment needed the incarnation of Messiah and his saving work, and his ascension to the throne the LORD, David's promised throne.

The Gospel is the fulfilment of God's promises to the Patriarchs. Perfect fulfilment awaits his return to establish the New Heaven and New Earth.

We are not yet into the Promised Messianic Age foretold by the OT prophets and John though!

 

[Yeshua1]

From the Preterist perspective, those terms have been redefined by the Dispensationalists. As I mentioned to Roby earlier, it's largely a matter of interpretation - especially as to what is "literal" vs symbolic. Good thing our salvation doesn't depend upon our eschatological view .

True, but we cannot spiritualize all of the OT prophecies of the Second Coming in order to have AD 70 be its realization!

 

[37818]

You just ignore the fact that sun moon and stars in prophecy, OT and NT, refer to people. THAT is the literal interpretation.

Not when the Sun and Moon refer to the Sun and Moon,
Matthew 24:29; Revelation 6:12.

 

[37818]

The futurist teaching certainly is not.

Either Matthew 24:29-31 is yet future or literally a failed prophecy.

 

[Lodic]

True, but we cannot spiritualize all of the OT prophecies of the Second Coming in order to have AD 70 be its realization!

Neither should we ignore the symbolism to make it literal to fit the futurist interpretation.

 

[Lodic]

Either Matthew 24:29-31 is yet future or literally a failed prophecy.

There is a 3rd possibility. This prophecy has been fulfilled, but you don't recognize it's fulfillment because you are looking for something else. As an old saying goes, "to a hammer, everything looks like a nail". To a "futurist", everything has to be literal, even when the original authors intended a symbolic meaning, and the original audiences understood the meanings to be symbolic. The 1st Century Christians were very familiar with Jewish symbolism of the OT.

 

[robycop3]

All Scripture must be interpreted according to its "literal" sense, whether it's historical narrative, didactic, poetic, or prophetic symbolism. To re-state the obvious, we will never agree. It's the "futurist" view that is made up by man; preterism is the orthodox view.

There's nothing orthodox about saying something's happened when it HASN'T happened.

 

[Lodic]

Ah, no. The rapture is explicitly taught, ". . . shall be caught up . . " 1 Thessalonians 4:17. And a distinction is made between the Jews and Gentiles in the church, Romans 1:16; Galatians 6:16; Revelation 21:12-14. So I am not understanding your problem. BTW, I am a post-trib futurist. I hold the Jews and Gentiles are raptured at the same time (Matthew 24:29-31).

1 Thess. 4:17 is commonly used to prove the rapture. In context, vs. 13-18 are about those who died in Christ, and the resurrection body. In vs. 16, we see that the Lord will descend from Heaven. "Descend" was used to describe the priest's descent from the Temple to announce that atonement had been completed. The idea of being "caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air" (vs. 17) is a picture of God's elect being brought into God's presence in the Holy of Holies. This describes the raising of those who are in Christ, not "the rapture". "The air" in this verse refers to the spiritual realm (compare Eph. 2:2).

The passage from Matt. 24:29-31 is symbolic language pointing to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 66-70. Heavenly bodies often symbolize earthly rulers and governments.

Jew / Gentile distinction - Paul often used the phrase "to the Jew first, and also to the Greek". In the history of redemption, salvation was brought to Israel first, as you well know. However, the Jews rejected Christ when they cried out "crucify Him". The Gentiles were grafted in. Thus, Galatians 6:16 actually goes to prove my point. In vs. 15, we read that whether one is circumcised or not makes no difference. The only thing that counts is to be a new creation. Thus, all who are new creations in Christ have become the true Israel of God. There is only one "people of God". Have you ever considered that, by definition, there were no Jews before Jacob was changed to Israel? Yet, even the Jews look back to Father Abraham, who was actually a Gentile. What is special about Abraham? He is known for his faith. We can see that we are one people through our faith.

That brings us to Rev. 21:9-14. Again, this passage goes more to prove my point. The gates of the Heavenly Jerusalem are the 12 tribes of Israel, and the foundation stones are the 12 apostles. The "true Israel" are those in Christ. The parable of the Landowner (Matt. 33-46) illustrates that the Kingdom of God was taken away from the nation of Israel and given to spiritual Israel.

 

[Lodic]

There's nothing orthodox about saying something's happened when it HASN'T happened.

If it hadn't happened, I would agree with you.

 

[robycop3]

If you really could "prove" your point regarding the "futurist" view of the Beast, etc., I'd switch back to that view. As it is, I see more proof to support the preterist view.

There's NO proof for the prwterist view. I've asked hundreds of prets for such proof, & all they've presented (if anything at all) is opinion, guesswork, tall tales, & Scripture-twisting. Since they can't present any proof, they hide behind scripture-twisting.

The true context of Scripture shows there was / will be no literal mark.

Only in the minds of those who don't want the mark to be literal. Scripture even specifies where it'll be placed!

I used to believe the mark of the beast would be a microchip, but I have dismissed that as science-fiction.

Good point regarding the mark of Cain, but I'm not about the nature of his mark. Maybe a topic for discussion sometime.

You have no good reason to do that, except your being taken by those quack pret authors.

Gary DeMar is a brilliant theologian, as are Ken Gentry and the late R.C. Sproul. I am quite sure the Scriptures are your ultimate source, and I assure you they are mine. We just disagree on what they say.

Long as they're prets, they're quacks.

Please take my advice & believe Scripture LITERALLY AS POSSIBLE. I fully realize there's SOME symbolism, similes, & metaphors in Scripture, but they always represent something LITERAL.

God meant His word to be an ABSOLUTE. We can't bend it to fit OUR agendas & man-made doctrines. It means what it says & says what it means. And the central events of Scripture are Jesus' coming as a man, and His future return, in all His power & glory. Also, it revolves around the Israelis, God's "peculiar" people.

You've been taken in by the quackery of Preston, Gentry, etc. Their stuff is phony as a Ford Corvette.

Jesus meant for us to know many of the details of His return & the events surrounding it. He told it to His disciples in straightforward language for them to record for all future generations.