The New Interpreters’s Study Bible (no doubt by accident) makes a case for Preterism!

[Martin Marprelate]

1. Hmmm, you know it is equally justifiable to ask if you can prove Jesus didn’t come back in 70 AD. Do you have any proof he didn’t?

I know this was directod at Old Regular, but just can't resist it. It's a priceless example of Logos 1's debating style.

Ok, Logos, the JWs believe that our Lord returned in 1914. Can you prove He didn't? Can you prove that He hasn't come back hundreds of times since His ascension? Can you prove He didn't come back in AD 35, which would be more in line with Matt 10:23 than AD 70 is? In order to suggest that something happened at a certain time you need to provide some evidence. Either you need an eye-witness, or you need a reputable historian. In both these respects you are on exactly the same level of proof as the J.W.s who also mis-interpret Biblical prophecy on a massive scale to 'prove' their erroneous doctrines.

Steve

Steve

 

[OldRegular]

I know this was directod at Old Regular, but just can't resist it. It's a priceless example of Logos 1's debating style.

Ok, Logos, the JWs believe that our Lord returned in 1914. Can you prove He didn't? Can you prove that He hasn't come back hundreds of times since His ascension? Can you prove He didn't come back in AD 35, which would be more in line with Matt 10:23 than AD 70 is? In order to suggest that something happened at a certain time you need to provide some evidence. Either you need an eye-witness, or you need a reputable historian. In both these respects you are on exactly the same level of proof as the J.W.s who also mis-interpret Biblical prophecy on a massive scale to 'prove' their erroneous doctrines.

Steve

Steve

Well said Steve. You will undoubtedly get copious praise from Logo for shining light in the darkness.

 

[OldRegular]

Your chosen way to read the passage is to cut out verse 9 and ignore the fact the apostles said that Christ disappeared from their sight—they admit they don’t see him so obviously they don’t know where he went that is why it was necessary for the angels to tell them that he went into heaven.

Logo

You are chasing your tail. You say that Jesus Christ disappeared from the disciple's sight. So the disciples saw Jesus Christ disappear, correct! They saw him with their physical eyes.

This simply verifies that he went into heaven. The coming in in verse 11 is coming into heaven not coming back to earth.

Has anyone on this thread said that verse 11 indicated Jesus Christ was coming to earth at that particular time? No! I suspect that most are able to read Scripture but in for your benefit I will post the passage again. It is a wonderful passage because it tells true believers, the Saints, that they will witness, SEE, His glorious return.

Acts 1:9-11, KJV

9. And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
10. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
11. Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Praise the Lord, He is coming back. And that dear old Apostle John tells us [Revelation 1:7]:

Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

And we all get to see Him, Praise the Lord!

LOGO
I highlight part of Verse 11 for your benefit.. Now these two men ... in white apparel tell the disciples: this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

What about that. These two men say that the disciples SAW Jesus Christ go into heaven.

So you see Logo that your statement below is patently false.

You of course don’t want to read it straight up, but need to cling to your preconceived notions as to how to understand it.

It is you, LOGO, who don't want to read this passage "straight up", as you say.

I also didn’t see you offer any proof that Christ didn’t return at the end of the age when he said he would.

Logo, Logo, Logo, what can we do to help you? You are a minimum of 1930 years ahead of your self. It is not the end of the age. No one has seen the visible return of the Lord Jesus Christ as the two men ... in white apparel tell the disciples! I have tried repeatedly to get you to show just one historical record, by any one of the "millions" who saw the temple burn. But you haven't. Why?

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

I am trying LOGO as is Mr. Martin Marprelate; but the sad truth is that some don't want to be enlightened. They are sort of like the Word of Faith people: They love darkness rather than light.

 

[OldRegular]

It helps if you realize that the Jewish term heaven and earth refers to the Temple and 2 Peter 3:7 Tells us the Temple (heaven and earth) are held in store for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

Logo

You say above that "the Jewish term heaven and earth refers to the Temple".

The first verse of Scripture tells me:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Does that mean that the first thing created was the Jewish temple? The Apostle Paul tells us:

Romans 3:1, 2 KJV
1. What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2. Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

The Jews were responsible the Old Testament writings. Wonder if they thought that the first thing God created was the temple in Jerusalem. I know that they revered it highly, actually unto death if one reads an account of its destruction in 70AD!

Just curious LOGO!

 

[Logos1]

The hyper-preterists are sad, don't you know? They believe that Jesus has already come, and that 1 Thess. 4:12-16 has already been fulfilled, and that I guess when we are buried, our bodies won't be resurrected, since Christ already came in AD 70. The Saducees did not believe in a resurrection, and neither do the hyper-preterists, which makes them "sad" "you" "see"!!

Greetings Convicted1 and thank you for your reply.

I see you have expressed your personal opinion of Preterism. There is nothing wrong with personal opinions. They don’t mean anything, establish anything, or influence God’s plan for anything so you might as well make your personal opinion as big and bold as your imagination will allow. I encourage you to indulge yourself and share with us the limits of your creativity.

As for actual debating I could respond by referring you to a good debating primer, but let me do it with an illustration instead.

You have leveled the usual litany of laundry list criticisms at Preterism. You have left them hanging up in the air not anchored to any biblical scripture or evidence why they would be legit. They are just unsubstantiated acquisitions born of either boredom or laziness.

Observe how I could do the same thing to futurism and say futurism is an out growth of snake handling. Now that wouldn’t be providing any reason why it is based on snake handling it is just a declarative statement anchored on nothing.

But if I follow your reasoning that would be just as legit a statement as the one you made.

Come to think of it if we both followed these statements up I could at least say snake handling was “in” the bible “you” “see”.

How would you find any support for your statements to show they are based on scripture?

You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[Logos1]

Oh dear! Logos seems to have forgotten to answer my question again.
Let me ask it one more time. How come that (according to you) the Gospel had got to the entire Roman world by around AD 60, but it hadn't got around the towns of Israel (which was part of the Roman world) by AD 70? It would be nice to get an answer on that, please. I can say 'pretty please' if you like, but I do expect you to answer. When you do, I will explain to you what Col 1:23 means, and reconcile it with the Matthew passages, though if you really want to know you can look it up in most decent Reformed commentaries.

Steve

Greetings my friend,

I see you have once again pretended you didn’t get an answer to the question. Instead of repeating myself again and torturing anybody reading this with the answer time and again and play along with your repeatedly ignoring the answer I’ll just refer you to post #72 paragraph 2 (and it is here other posts as well which I’m sure you already know). Since the answer is a problem for you I’m sure you will ignore it once again—go ahead and prove me right.

While I have been able to reconcile my position to scripture you still haven’t even attempted to reconcile your version—maybe you don’t really have any faith in your position when you get called out on it. It seems you are only good at ignoring questions—but you have plenty of futurists to keep you company.

You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[Logos1]

I know this was directod at Old Regular, but just can't resist it. It's a priceless example of Logos 1's debating style.

Ok, Logos, the JWs believe that our Lord returned in 1914. Can you prove He didn't? Can you prove that He hasn't come back hundreds of times since His ascension? Can you prove He didn't come back in AD 35, which would be more in line with Matt 10:23 than AD 70 is? In order to suggest that something happened at a certain time you need to provide some evidence. Either you need an eye-witness, or you need a reputable historian. In both these respects you are on exactly the same level of proof as the J.W.s who also mis-interpret Biblical prophecy on a massive scale to 'prove' their erroneous doctrines.

Steve

Steve

Steve,

When preterists point to the 70 AD return of Christ they have sound biblical reasons to support the position. They don’t jump all over history with the date. If you want to say Christ did or didn’t come back in AD 35 or 1916 why don’t you try making a case for it.

It seems you simply use it to avoid backing up your assertion that he didn’t come back in AD 70. So far you haven’t made any case to support your position that he didn’t come back in AD 70.

I don’t suppos you want to indulge us with any actual reason, evidence, or proof of your position do you?

You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[Logos1]

Logo

You say above that "the Jewish term heaven and earth refers to the Temple".

The first verse of Scripture tells me:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Does that mean that the first thing created was the Jewish temple? The Apostle Paul tells us:

Romans 3:1, 2 KJV
1. What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2. Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

The Jews were responsible the Old Testament writings. Wonder if they thought that the first thing God created was the temple in Jerusalem. I know that they revered it highly, actually unto death if one reads an account of its destruction in 70AD!

Just curious LOGO!

Oldregular this was a very weak attempt to assert the bible doesn’t use the statement heaven and earth to denote the Temple and structuring their society around the Old Covenant rituals.

You probably don’t recall I said read the verses around it for context. I’m sure if you make that tiny effort you would be fast to agree heaven and earth denotes the temple.

Here are some examples you might file for future reference. Simply insert the term temple in place of heaven and earth and see how well it fits in with the verses surrounding the verse given.

Matthew 5:18
For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

Matthew 24:35
Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.

2 Peter 3:7
But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.


You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[Logos1]

Logo

You are chasing your tail. You say that Jesus Christ disappeared from the disciple's sight. So the disciples saw Jesus Christ disappear, correct! They saw him with their physical eyes.



Has anyone on this thread said that verse 11 indicated Jesus Christ was coming to earth at that particular time? No! I suspect that most are able to read Scripture but in for your benefit I will post the passage again. It is a wonderful passage because it tells true believers, the Saints, that they will witness, SEE, His glorious return.

Acts 1:9-11, KJV

9. And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
10. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
11. Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Praise the Lord, He is coming back. And that dear old Apostle John tells us [Revelation 1:7]:

Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

And we all get to see Him, Praise the Lord!

LOGO
I highlight part of Verse 11 for your benefit.. Now these two men ... in white apparel tell the disciples: this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

What about that. These two men say that the disciples SAW Jesus Christ go into heaven.

So you see Logo that your statement below is patently false.

It is you, LOGO, who don't want to read this passage "straight up", as you say.





Logo, Logo, Logo, what can we do to help you? You are a minimum of 1930 years ahead of your self. It is not the end of the age. No one has seen the visible return of the Lord Jesus Christ as the two men ... in white apparel tell the disciples! I have tried repeatedly to get you to show just one historical record, by any one of the "millions" who saw the temple burn. But you haven't. Why?




I am trying LOGO as is Mr. Martin Marprelate; but the sad truth is that some don't want to be enlightened. They are sort of like the Word of Faith people: They love darkness rather than light.

Greetings my friend,

I see you are still missing the point of Acts 1:9-11.

Probably if you studied up on your heavens it would clear up the passage for you. You see there are three different heavens used in the bible

1. the clouds
2. the stars
3. the place where God dwells

Sooooo, Acts tells us Christ goes only to the first heaven –clouds in verse 9 when he disappears out of their sight. After that they don’t see him and depend on the angels to tell them where He went. The angels would be saying he is going into heaven as the dwelling place of God (3rd heaven ) just like they saw him disappear in the clouds (1st heaven).

So this passage is not related to Revelation 1:7 which means discern with the mind not see with the eye.

You will no doubt deny it, but I’m pretty confident God doesn’t change events to suit your wishes.

You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[Logos1]

More Proof Positive the Bible teaches a first century return

Well my futurists friends have had the forum to themselves all day and only managed to repeat themselves again over and over. I could settle for just pointing out the abject failure of futurism for yet another day, but I will provide some more proof positive that the bible tells us Christ would return in the first century.

Romans 16:20
English Standard Version (ESV)
20 The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

It is obvious that Paul is telling the Romans that God will soon crush Satan under their feet. He didn’t say thousands of years in the future. He didn’t say under the feet of people thousands of years in the future, but their feet. He is explicit that it is soon and their feet.

Again we see another verse where it can only be read to mean the first century audience he is writing to. It is blasphemy to deny the obvious intention of this scripture.

You have to accept its soon coming meaning or take a position that Paul was not an inspired writer and therefore cast doubt on everything he taught.

In light of yet another verse you have to say futurism’s goose is done you can put a fork in it.


You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Greetings my friend,

I see you have once again pretended you didn’t get an answer to the question. Instead of repeating myself again and torturing anybody reading this with the answer time and again and play along with your repeatedly ignoring the answer I’ll just refer you to post #72 paragraph 2 (and it is here other posts as well which I’m sure you already know). Since the answer is a problem for you I’m sure you will ignore it once again—go ahead and prove me right.

Well, here is your post #72, paragraph 2

Reconciling is easy Steve you just like to make scripture rigid when it suits your purposes and over look part of altogether at other times when that suits your purposes. Going through every little town and back water is different than going to all the major cities. So who do we believe Steve and his inspired word or Jesus and his inspired word? You can of course promote yourself over the words of Christ in your own mind, but let me think on it for a second. Hmmm, that is about long enough I’ll go with Christ and what he said. Tough decision that was—not.

I don't see any attempt to answer my question, so here it is again: How come the Gospel had been (according to you) preached all all the Roman world ('proclaimed to every creature under heaven') by around AD 60-61, yet the Apostles hadn't finished going through all the towns in Israel by AD 70? Surely proclaiming to every creature is a bigger job than going through towns, and the 'Roman World' is hundreds of times bigger than 1st Century Israel? So how come? When you tell me, I promise to tell you what Col 1:28 really means and to reconcile it with the two Matthew passages, but I'm not going to do so until you answer me.

Steve

 

[OldRegular]

LOGO

Acts 1:9-11, KJV

9. And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
10. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
11. Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Revelation 1:7, KJV

Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

{LOGO I have emphasized the above Scripture since your eye sight is apparently as flawed as your doctrine}


LOGO: You say millions of people witnessed the burning of the Jewish temple in 70 AD. I have requested many many times that you produce just one recorded account, from all these millions, of the return of Jesus Christ as promised in the above Scripture. When you do that you can close the thread with the satisfaction that YOU have won the debate and many on this Forum might?? then become heretical hyper preterists like you, that is HHP for short.

However, HOWEVER, until you are able to produce one historical record of the sighting [that is seeing with unflawed eyesight] of Jesus Christ in 70 AD then you are like the one described in Proverbs 26:11.

By the way, I see Steve, perhaps better known as Martin Marprelate , is having as much difficulty getting you to answer a simple question as I have.

 

[Logos1]

LOGO


LOGO: You say millions of people witnessed the burning of the Jewish temple in 70 AD. I have requested many many times that you produce just one recorded account, from all these millions, of the return of Jesus Christ as promised in the above Scripture. When you do that you can close the thread with the satisfaction that YOU have won the debate and many on this Forum might?? then become heretical hyper preterists like you, that is HHP for short.

We all know of Josephus' account.

Your welcome

You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[Logos1]

Well, here is your post #72, paragraph 2




I don't see any attempt to answer my question, so here it is again: How come the Gospel had been (according to you) preached all all the Roman world ('proclaimed to every creature under heaven') by around AD 60-61, yet the Apostles hadn't finished going through all the towns in Israel by AD 70? Surely proclaiming to every creature is a bigger job than going through towns, and the 'Roman World' is hundreds of times bigger than 1st Century Israel? So how come? When you tell me, I promise to tell you what Col 1:28 really means and to reconcile it with the two Matthew passages, but I'm not going to do so until you answer me.

Steve

Thank you for re-posting the paragraph and proving my point that you are the only one who doesn't see the reconciliation.

Besides hoisting yourself on your own petard again you have of course still not provided any path to futurist reconciliation and you are still left with a bigger problem.

You are disputing the words of both Christ and Paul. Of course such is your haste in arguing with anything I say it doesn't matter to you if you run over Christ and Paul in the process.

You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[OldRegular]

We all know of Josephus' account.

How about a quote from Josephus showing that he saw our Lord Jesus Christ in person.

 

[OldRegular]

LOGO: You say millions of people witnessed the burning of the Jewish temple in 70 AD. I have requested many many times that you produce just one recorded account, from all these millions, of the return of Jesus Christ as promised in the above Scripture. When you do that you can close the thread with the satisfaction that YOU have won the debate and many on this Forum might?? then become heretical hyper preterists like you, that is HHP for short.

You are obviously unable to meet this request and that is a fact!

 

[Logos1]

How about a quote from Josephus showing that he saw our Lord Jesus Christ in person.

Since Jesus himself (Matthew 24) linked his return, the end of the age, and the destruction of the temple and Rev 1:7 means discernment not eyeballs it looks like you have managed to paint yourself in a corner on this point also oldregular.

Of course I don't think disputing the words of Christ would be an issue to you.

Well it looks like I have linked through Jesus words and Josephus extensive writings about the destruction of the temple an eye witness account about Christ's return in 70 AD.

Oh by the way--I don't believe you can find any eye witness accounts to dispute the return of Christ in 70 AD.

You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Thank you for re-posting the paragraph and proving my point that you are the only one who doesn't see the reconciliation.

Besides hoisting yourself on your own petard again you have of course still not provided any path to futurist reconciliation and you are still left with a bigger problem.

You are disputing the words of both Christ and Paul. Of course such is your haste in arguing with anything I say it doesn't matter to you if you run over Christ and Paul in the process.

I'm not disputing anything at the moment. I just want to get an answer to my question: How come the Gospel had been (according to you) preached in all the Roman world ('proclaimed to every creature under heaven') by around AD 60-61, yet the Apostles hadn't finished going through all the towns in Israel by AD 70?
I'm sorry but I still can't see an answer from you. Explain it simply to me, as to a child. I'm sure it's terribly simple and I am just a bear of very little brain, so stoop to my foolisheness and give me an answer.

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

This is just how I feel. Sometimes I feel that you're never going to answer my question, :BangHead: but I just keep plodding on.

Steve

 

[Logos1]

Steve disputes the Words of Christ and Paul

I'm not disputing anything at the moment. I just want to get an answer to my question: How come the Gospel had been (according to you) preached in all the Roman world ('proclaimed to every creature under heaven') by around AD 60-61, yet the Apostles hadn't finished going through all the towns in Israel by AD 70?
I'm sorry but I still can't see an answer from you. Explain it simply to me, as to a child. I'm sure it's terribly simple and I am just a bear of very little brain, so stoop to my foolisheness and give me an answer.

This is just how I feel. Sometimes I feel that you're never going to answer my question, :BangHead: but I just keep plodding on.

Steve

Really Steve--LOL!

Do you not see that their is a difference between going through every little town and backwater of Israel an being able to take the Gospel to the major cities of the Mediterranean area.

Every creature in your book has to mean every camel, dog, and gnat, but most of us recognize it for what it is--remember when the dream turned Paul away from one city so he could go to another.

If Christ said they wouldn't go through the towns of Israel before he came that would be good enough for most believers--where do get off disputing the words of Christ


If Paul said it had been taken to the world--your want to argue with him-not me I'm just pointing it out.

Now I'm going to make a prediction and predict you will go right on and claim you don't have an answer even though Christ and Paul have answered you and I have laid it out in your asked for child like terms.

You are obviously of superior intellect, why I guess relative to anyone on this Forum…..Oldregular

Enlighten all us poor Biblical illiterates…Oldregular

A lesser man might get discouraged in this task, but I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

 

[asterisktom]

Really Steve--LOL!

Do you not see that their is a difference between going through every little town and backwater of Israel an being able to take the Gospel to the major cities of the Mediterranean area.

Every creature in your book has to mean every camel, dog, and gnat, but most of us recognize it for what it is--remember when the dream turned Paul away from one city so he could go to another.

etc.

It gets frustrating to try to convince someone of what is clearly in scripture. Our culturally inherited blinders are very strongly implanted.

Sometimes I think it is futile, Logos, to continue in these debates. But then again I remember that there was a time when I would have said pretty much the same things that OldRegular and MartinMarPrel say here to you - but I finally turned out to be one of the heretical Full Preterists. Ultimately, it was just when I took the time to just study out those problem passages.