Prophecy concerning Israel

[Winman]

3. I'll give you that Zechariah can be difficult to understand. When I was switching my position from futurist to full preterist I has some reservations because I didn't see how Zechariah was fulfilled. Now that I understand how it was fulfilled I see it as more resounding proof of the preterist position.

I did a post on Zechariah 14 and it was so long it took more than one post to do so I won't repeat all of it here. I'll give you the link.
In short--the Tenth Legion was Christ's foot stepping down on the Mount of Olives in judgment, it was split by virtue of their trenching activities and what you think are atomic weapons describes the Jews inside Jerusalem not those on the outside. The skin melting off their bones is a great description of the Jews inside starving during the siege of Jerusalem. This would also be the time as detailed by Josephus when the Deut. 28 prophecy was fulfilled when they cannibalized their young.

You are totally grasping at straws here and trying (without success I might add) to make 70 A.D. fit Zechariah's prophesy. It is the attacking army who is destroyed in this prophesy, not the Jews.

And when have all the nations come up every year to Jerusalem to worship the Lord and celebrate the feast of tabernacles? Show us where that has happened in history.

Preterist is not new, it is old. There were men in the NT who said the resurrection was past already (which Preterists teach). Paul warned against this false teaching.

2 Tim 2:16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

Preterists believe themselves to have some special revelation that others do not hold. It is not new, it is the error of Hymenaeus and Philetus.

According to Preterists, the resurrection is past. They do not believe that we will be resurrected bodily.

This from a Preterist website:

Granted, there may be other permutations of these interpretations. I will not even address the futurist interpretation of physical bodies rising out of the ground,

So you see, they deny a bodily resurrection.

They cannot explain the millennial reign of Christ. They teach he came in 70 A.D., but not physically . This is also warned of in scripture.

2 John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

When Jesus rose from the dead, he arose bodily. He allowed the apostles to touch him, he ate in front of them.

Preterists deny that Jesus returned bodily and physically in 70 A.D.. Beware of anyone who denies Jesus came in the flesh.

Jesus did not return in 70 A.D., there is no evidence for this. He did not set up his millennial kingdom. This will happen in the future. And when Jesus returns, he will return as he left, in a real, physical body.

 

[Logos1]

Here comes the name calling

I take comfort in Winman calling me an antichrist. Futurist usually call me names--I've been called the devil before by them. When they run out of arguments the name calling starts. You know they are out of ammo at that point.

I'll just make one short point--Jesus himself told us he wouldn't set up an earthly millennial kingdom nor any other kind of earthly kingdom.

John 18:36: My kingdom is not of this world and

Luke 17:20 The kingdom of God does not come with observation

If Jesus said it that is good enough for me.

Have a blessed day Winman.

 

[Logos1]

The Apostles were full Preterists

I knew I couldn't resist the logic of the full preterist position upon realizing that the apostles held to that belief.

Scholars and teachers of all eschatological beliefs agree that the Apostles believed, taught, and wrote in their epistles that Christ would return in their generation.

If you believe that the bible is the inerrant, divinely inspired word of God and I believe it is in its original manuscripts then you can't argue with the Apostle's teachings.

Since the Apostles taught that Christ would return in their generation either they are right and he did or else they are wrong and the bible is not inerrant. And, if the bible is not inerrant then every thing it says and every aspect of Christianity is up for grabs. How would we ever know for sure what to believe and what not to believe.

None of us is more inspired than the Apostles. They are the ones whom Jesus told he would send the Holy Spirit to them so they would remember what he taught them.

Since the divinely inspired Apostles taught Christ would return in their generation that settles the matter for me.

This simply means what we have been taught that the second coming would be a world ending event is wrong. It was a coming in judgment at the time the old covenant ended and the new covenant came into its own.

 

[RAdam]

The apostles did not preach a full preterist position. They preached that some things had been fulfilled, some things would be fulfilled in the next few decades, and some things would be fulfilled at a later date. A perfect example is 2 Peter 3, which refers to part of the Olivet Discourse and Isaiah 65. 2 Peter 3 tell us that at a later date Christ will return and destroy the world that now is.

4 disciples asked Jesus 3 questions on the Mount of Olives. Matthew records those 3 questions. Mark and Luke record 2 questions. Ever wonder why there is a difference? Because, in the mind of those disciples then (who hadn't yet been led by the Comforter, the Spirit of truth, into all truth) they were asking about the same time event. The destruction of the temple and the second coming/end of the world were at the same time in their minds according to what they had grown up believeing. Jesus, however, tells them otherwise. This is clearly seen by the fact that He gives them a clear sign of the destruction of Jerusalem, but tells them that of the time of His second coming and the end of the world, none but God knew that hour. In other words, He gives them a clear sign of one but won't do so for the other. That's because He is describing two events set 1940 years apart and counting.

 

[jbh28]

I knew I couldn't resist the logic of the full preterist position upon realizing that the apostles held to that belief.

Scholars and teachers of all eschatological beliefs agree that the Apostles believed, taught, and wrote in their epistles that Christ would return in their generation.

If you believe that the bible is the inerrant, divinely inspired word of God and I believe it is in its original manuscripts then you can't argue with the Apostle's teachings.

Since the Apostles taught that Christ would return in their generation either they are right and he did or else they are wrong and the bible is not inerrant. And, if the bible is not inerrant then every thing it says and every aspect of Christianity is up for grabs. How would we ever know for sure what to believe and what not to believe.

None of us is more inspired than the Apostles. They are the ones whom Jesus told he would send the Holy Spirit to them so they would remember what he taught them.

Since the divinely inspired Apostles taught Christ would return in their generation that settles the matter for me.

This simply means what we have been taught that the second coming would be a world ending event is wrong. It was a coming in judgment at the time the old covenant ended and the new covenant came into its own.

What verse(s) are you referring to when you say that Apostles taught that Christ would return in their generation?

 

[asterisktom]

1946 Israel was "reborn" as a nation. What scripture in the Old or New Testement points to this as a fufillment and "Israel" being mentioned as part end time events or second coming. Over the years I have hear some pastors or bible teachers quoting Zechariah 12:10 "They will look on me, the one they have pierced,", as the end time when Israel will see Jesus......BUT I see in the gospel of John "John himself" mentioned this scripture as fufilled John 19:37 "and, as another scripture says, "They will look on the one they have pierced." while Jesus was on the cross. So is this a DOUBLE prophecy? Bad interpetation "not intentionally" by some readers?

I believe you answered your own question. When the Bible said something is fulfilled, like it does in John 19:36-37, we don't need to look for another fulfillment.

 

[Logos1]

Scriptual Proof the Apostles Expected Christ's Return in their Generation

A simple reading of the actual bible verses on the Olivet discourse as opposed to some commentary will reveal that Jesus didn’t say you disciples are really asking about two separate things. Further, many people imprison Jesus in the time period he was on earth and made the statement that no one knows, but the Father; however, it is obvious that when Jesus has gone to heaven he knows more than he did in his human form on earth. He gives John much detail and says seven times he is coming soon in the book of Revelation. He never said there was a new definition for the word soon. The Greek root of the word Jesus used when he said he was coming quickly is the same word Paul used when he was in prison to tell Timothy he needed him and to come to him quickly. Would anybody buy it if somebody tried to tell you Paul meant for Timothy to drag around for years before coming to him.

Greetings jbh28 as you read through the epistles just keep an eye out for it and it is obvious that their instructions to their audience indicate they expect Christ to return in their time. Even the most ardent dispensationalist commentary acknowledges it.

Here is one example. 1 Timothy 6: 13 & 14. I charge you to keep the commandment without spot or blame until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ…Notice he didn’t say something like as long as you can or until you die or as long as you live—the charge is specifically till the appearing of Christ. Another example is James 5:8 You too must be patient. Make your hearts firm, because the coming of the Lord is at hand.
Another example 1 John 2:18: Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.
And this one actually refers to the period after he returns. Romans 13:11- 13: And do this, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep; for now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed. 12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand. Therefore let us cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armor of light. 13 Let us walk properly, as in the day…The phrase “as in the day” refers to post Old Covenant time and living in the New Covenant only. It is after Christ has already returned and completely ushered in the New Covenant. He is telling them to start living properly right now and not wait for the day.

Also note that as you move through the New Testament that His coming gets more imminent. The last days of 2 Timothy 3:1 becomes the last hour of 1 John 2:18.

If you want a real eye opening book read J. Stuart Russell’s The Parousia which gives details about Christ’s second coming for all the New Testament books. It was written in the 1800s, but is still fascinating to read today.

Also note that when 2 Peter talks about the World being destroyed by fire he isn’t talking about the cosmos, he uses the term World to refer to the way Jewish society is organized around the Old Covenant Temple. Don Preston goes into great detail on this in his book The Elements shall Melt with Fervent Heat: A study of 2 Peter 3. You won’t think of eschatology the same way after reading either book.

Any honest reading of the New Testament makes it obvious that the Apostles, guided by the Holy Spirit, expect Christ’s return in their generation. Any argument with that is not with me it is making yourself out to be more inspired than the Apostles and arguing with them.

 

[Jedi Knight]

I believe you answered your own question. When the Bible said something is fulfilled, like it does in John 19:36-37, we don't need to look for another fulfillment.

After looking futher what do you make of this scripture?
Revelation 1:7 BEHOLD, HE IS COMING WITH THE CLOUDS, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen. Diffrent then what John pointed out in John 19?

 

[Jedi Knight]

Greetings Ashleysdad,

In the matter regarding John, you are right in the point he is telling Peter to follow him.Logos1

Peter was just told how he would glorify God in his death....so Peter say "what about Him?". Jesus was saying "none of your business" basically. Even John said a So a RUMOR started over this but John pointed out this was not what Jesus ment and stopped the rumor.

 

[RAdam]

So Jesus gives them a clear sign about the first thing He talks about when He tells them, "when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is night." Yet Jesus says of the end of the world, "but of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." So He gives his disciples a clear sign when the destruction of the city and temple and the desolations determined would be poured upon "this people", yet He tells them they cannot possibly know the time when it will come to pass? That makes no sense. If you would simply read the Olivet Discourse as it is record in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, one must conclude that He is talking about two separate events, the desolation of Jerusalem and the Jewish people in the first century, and His second coming and end of the world, the latter of which has yet to be accomplished.

Both the preterist and the futurist are wrong on the Olivet Discourse. Consider that the preterist will be very literal with the first portion of that discourse, but the latter portions he will suddenly become very allegorical. The futurist is the exact opposite. If one, instead of taking one of those two extreme positions, realizes that Jesus is talking about two separate events in history, he/she can take that entire section of scripture in a fairly literal sense (as much as you can any prophecy) with high consistency.

 

[Logos1]

Nice example of selective scripture reading

Peter was just told how he would glorify God in his death....so Peter say "what about Him?". Jesus was saying "none of your business" basically. Even John said a So a RUMOR started over this but John pointed out this was not what Jesus ment and stopped the rumor.

Just because Jesus instructs Peter to get in line and follow him does not negate the implied life of John till his return. Notice how jedi has completely ignored Rev 1:7 which says the ones who pierced him will see his return.

Unless they are still alive today....must mean Our Lord returned in 70 AD.

The end of the Old Covenant age is 70 AD when the temple was destroyed and Christ returns in judgment against the Jewish rulers then in the form of the Roman army just as God came in judgment against various nations at different times in judgment through armies. We never saw a bodily manifestation of God then either. Christ didn't say he was changing the form of a judgment coming in to an event where he would show up in the sky with a torso and legs and arms attached to it etc that people could see. When he told the Jewish leaders he was coming on the clouds with power and glory they understood him precisely. It is modern day prophecy pundits that insist on changing the meaning of Christs words into their own choosing.

They have been wrong for 2000 years and counting and get more wrong everyday. As we move forward through time the futurist position loses more and more credibility and the preterist position looks more and more credible.

 

[percho]

Preterists

Give me an understanding the parable from Luke 19:11-27. verse by verse

Thanks

 

[asterisktom]

Preterists

Give me an understanding the parable from Luke 19:11-27. verse by verse

Thanks

I'll pass. You gave us a heaping assignment in a very short post. Maybe if you put your finger on verses that you think would be problematic...

 

[Jedi Knight]

Just because Jesus instructs Peter to get in line and follow him does not negate the implied life of John till his return.

So even though John himself put an end to the rumor...you still carry it?

 

[Logos1]

Indeed I do Jedi. I try to make a habit of reading the bible straight up and not twist it to suit my views.

Should we expect an answer about "those who pierced him" or will we have to wait till the second coming as they say for that as well?

It is sad what the non preterist miss out on. We preterist can celebrate the victory of Christ over (sin) death and our redemption back into the presence of God upon death now, but non preterist have to wait till they die to find out they were wrong.

Not to worry I promise not to gloat on the other side we all meet there.

 

[Jedi Knight]

Indeed I do Jedi. I try to make a habit of reading the bible straight up and not twist it to suit my views.

Should we expect an answer about "those who pierced him" or will we have to wait till the second coming as they say for that as well?

It is sad what the non preterist miss out on. We preterist can celebrate the victory of Christ over (sin) death and our redemption back into the presence of God upon death now, but non preterist have to wait till they die to find out they were wrong.

Not to worry I promise not to gloat on the other side we all meet there.

Sad? When you totally missed John's point? The scripture is pretty clear about it was a rumor not fact.

 

[Grasshopper]

Preterists

Give me an understanding the parable from Luke 19:11-27. verse by verse

Thanks

Luk 19:12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.

Did the nobleman return in the lifetime of the servants?

Luk 19:15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

Interpret prophecy however you wish, but keep it in the context of the time statments given. If time statements can be ignored, then prophecy can be twisted into anything (Hal Lindsey).

 

[percho]

Luk 19:12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.

Did the nobleman return in the lifetime of the servants?

Luk 19:15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

Interpret prophecy however you wish, but keep it in the context of the time statments given. If time statements can be ignored, then prophecy can be twisted into anything (Hal Lindsey).

I must confess that I am not up on the preterist view. Has 1 Cor. 15:50-54 been fulfilled also Rev. 11:15-18. If they have are there any prophecies that have not been fulfilled.

Thanks

 

[Grasshopper]

I must confess that I am not up on the preterist view. Has 1 Cor. 15:50-54 been fulfilled

Partial-preterist would say no, full-preterist would say yes. Pick up RC Sproul's " The Last Days According to Jesus" for an excellent resource on the difference between these views.

Read on in the passage:

1Co 15:54 and when this corruptible may have put on incorruption, and this mortal may have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, `The Death was swallowed up--to victory;
1Co 15:55 where, O Death, thy sting? where, O Hades, thy victory?'
1Co 15:56 and the sting of the death is the sin, and the power of the sin the law;

Questions to consider. Paul quotes two OT passages. Do those quotations dealing with "death" speak of physical death? Secondly, why does Paul associate death with the law? does the law cause physical death? Finally you must go back to Genesis, did Adams sin result in physical death? Read this post: http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=66966 then think about the implications when it comes to 1 Cor. 15.

also Rev. 11:15-18. If they have are there any prophecies that have not been fulfilled.

I believe both would see these as fulfilled. Partial-prets would see the latter chapters of Revelation as still future.

 

[percho]

There is a reason why the Lamb of God was slain from the foundation of the world which predates Adam at least by a few days and it has to do with creation. 1 Corinthians 15 talks about it. The Word was made a living soul born of Mary. They called him, this living soul, Jesus the Christ. The living soul Jesus died. God the Father raised him from the dead and the quickening spirit Jesus the Christ became the firstborn from the dead. Until he returns the only one so born. The creation groaning and travailing waiting for his return when we being conformed to his firstborn image he will be known as the firstborn of many brethren. Jesus the Christ also talked about this in John 3. Prophet, Priest and lets pray for thy kingdom come King.