Thessalonian Comfort or Future Coming? 2 Thess. 1

[Grasshopper]

Thank you.

First, I gave the verse Peter gave us that one thousand years is to the Lord as one day. That scriptural thought along with the fact that no one knows the day or the hour of His coming makes room for speculation as to that timing even from the hand of the inspired writers.

So time statements are meaningless for us. Yet somehow every futurist I know of seems to think we will know when it is near according to:

Mat 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.


So actually when these things begin to happen know that it is "near"(thousands of years in God time). C'mon Hank I expect better from you.

Your interpretation leaves us with "near" and "not near" meaning the same thing!

Revelation 10

5 And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven,
6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer​

No more delay.

OK then its your problem not mine.

Yes, it is my problem trying to understand how you arrived at that interpretation.

I dont care what John Owen, Darby or John Gill have to say.

I have you pegged as more of a LaHaye, Lindsey, Pentecost kinda guy. Or perhaps you reject all scholarship and interpret all on your own???

Redeemed Israel.

A.K.A.....The Church.

Because the Tribulation is a another page in the History of God's dealing with mankind, It's called the Day of the Lord. The Times of the Gentiles crosses the boundary of the church age into that tribulation for 42 months.

Of course one slight problem, according to Rev 11 it seems the Jews are already in control of Jerusalem:

Rev 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

There in their Temple and its outer court and they are worshipping there. Doesn't look like the Gentiles are trodding it down yet. Better come up with another timeline.

Yes, I have chosen to deal with the difficulties of futurism than those of full preterism.

What are the difficulties of futurism?

Look at the verse again, it is Jesus who is speaking about that evil servant (of whom we have many in the world today).

Yes let us all look at the verse again:

Luk 12:45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
Mat 24:48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;

It is clearly not Jesus teaching His delay, quite the opposite in fact. It is the evil servant who is putting that forth.

I explained the delay "theory" it seems to us to be a delay since God's view of a "delay" is to be interpreted as subjective to the mind of God as Peter has shown.

But why does it seem to us as a delay? Because the inspired writers lead their readers to believe it was soon. But if they understood "soon" through the filter of 2 Peter ,as you would have us do, then they would have understood that is "God's time" thus they would not have been expecting it necessarily anytime soon. Do you not see the problem?:BangHead:​

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.

It is indeed at hand, at the very door. To an eternal God it is as close today as then.

And meaningless words to that 1st century audience.

You didn't mention this passage in Revelation

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.​

Didn't know I was suppose to.

Adam Clarke:

Rev 1:7
Behold, he cometh with clouds - This relates to his coming to execute judgment on the enemies of his religion; perhaps to his coming to destroy Jerusalem, as he was to be particularly manifested to them that pierced him, which must mean the incredulous and rebellious Jews.
And all kindreds of the earth - Πασαι αἱ φυλαι της γης· All the tribes of the land. By this the Jewish people are most evidently intended, and therefore the whole verse may be understood as predicting the destruction of the Jews; and is a presumptive proof that the Apocalypse was written before the final overthrow of the Jewish state.

See, you don't even have to be a full preterist to understand that verse in a 1st century context.

 

[Grasshopper]

Slack: Strong's 1019

braduno {brad-oo'-no}

Meaning: ​

1) to delay, be slow 1a) to render slowly, retard 1b) to be long, to tarry, loiter​

HankD

Heb 10:37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.

Hmmmmmmm​

​

 

[lastday]

Lastday

Logos,

You actually give the statement that refutes your own argument:

To try to make the point that time statements are utterly irrelevant
in the bible because God is timeless therefore his time statements
indicating a quick return have no meaning to a timeless God.

The fulfillment of TIME is "utterly irrelevant" to God's infinite knowledge!
But He explains that fulfillment with respect to our limited knowledge!!
That Jesus is coming "soon" AND "swiftly" applies to all of us now!!!
Here is where you admit what you claim to dispute:

Therefore the temporal nature of the time statements are relevant
to man. When Christ says he is coming quickly it is based on what
is quickly to its audience – man.

That's why you can't continue to eliminate US in waiting until He appears!
The DELAY has to do with the fulfillment of TIME and it hasn't ended yet!!
The wait includes the 1260 days for demonstrating God's Kingdom Power!!!

Mankind "sees the Two Prophets arise from death and ascend to heaven"!
That's when God says those who "must be killed have just been killed"!!
One Hundred verses in Revelation will be fulfilled on that same day!!!
Mel

 

[HankD]

Heb 10:37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.

​

Hmmmmmmm​

A little while - Almost 2000 years so far - less than 2 days to God.

HankD

 

[HankD]

So time statements are meaningless for us. Yet somehow every futurist I know of seems to think we will know when it is near according to:

Mat 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

Not meaningless, but nebulous in keeping with "no man knows the day or the hour".

So actually when these things begin to happen know that it is "near"(thousands of years in God time). C'mon Hank I expect better from you.

Your interpretation leaves us with "near" and "not near" meaning the same thing!

Not so, we are closer now than 2000 years ago. Also your expectations ought not to be with me or any other man. If you believe you have the correct view of the Second Coming all well and good.

No more delay.

You are entitled to that opinion, it's just not mine.

Yes, it is my problem trying to understand how you arrived at that interpretation.

Why? I know what HankD believes doesn't keep you awake at night.

It would be different if we hadn't been down this road so many times.

If you really want to know, just go through the copious threads we have journeyed through and review these things.

I have you pegged as more of a LaHaye, Lindsey, Pentecost kinda guy. Or perhaps you reject all scholarship and interpret all on your own???

FWIW, obviously, I have studied the several dispensational theories extensively and to be honest I am not a cookie cutter image of any one of them but have a synthesis view of my own.

Many of my thoughts are just that - thoughts, opinions, etc. not convictions so much as preferences or loosely held views.

Some of the eschatalogical essentials that I would endorse would be the distinction between Israel and the Church, the time of the Tribulation, the Millenium, Redeemed Israel with Christ as Lord over all the earth, Armeggedon, the Eternal State.

Again this just FWIW to you or anyone.

A.K.A.....The Church.

In your view.

Of course one slight problem, according to Rev 11 it seems the Jews are already in control of Jerusalem:

Rev 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
There in their Temple and its outer court and they are worshipping there. Doesn't look like the Gentiles are trodding it down yet. Better come up with another timeline..

Many gentiles will be saved in the tribulation.

Revelation 7
9 After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands,
10 and crying out with a loud voice, saying, "Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!"
11 All the angels stood around the throne and the elders and the four living creatures, and fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God,
12 saying: "Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom, Thanksgiving and honor and power and might, Be to our God forever and ever. Amen."
13 Then one of the elders answered, saying to me, "Who are these arrayed in white robes, and where did they come from?"
14 And I said to him, "Sir, you know." So he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.​

Many will not and they shall continue to trod down Jerusalem.

What are the difficulties of futurism?

I have answered that many times, go back even through this thread and see.

Yes let us all look at the verse again:

Luk 12:45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
Mat 24:48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;

It is clearly not Jesus teaching His delay, quite the opposite in fact. It is the evil servant who is putting that forth.

By giving this illustration, Christ is opening the door to the possibility of His delay. Given that, He then shows the characteristics of this type of evil servant, basically one who has not the agape love of God in His heart or he wouldn't be beating (physically or verbally, IMO) his fellow servants.

But why does it seem to us as a delay? Because the inspired writers lead their readers to believe it was soon. But if they understood "soon" through the filter of 2 Peter ,as you would have us do, then they would have understood that is "God's time" thus they would not have been expecting it necessarily anytime soon. Do you not see the problem?

No.

And meaningless words to that 1st century audience.

No, not then or now.

Didn't know I was suppose to.

Evidently, so that is why I did.

Adam Clarke:
Rev 1:7
Behold, he cometh with clouds - This relates to his coming to execute judgment on the enemies of his religion; perhaps to his coming to destroy Jerusalem, as he was to be particularly manifested to them that pierced him, which must mean the incredulous and rebellious Jews.
And all kindreds of the earth - Πασαι αἱ φυλαι της γης· All the tribes of the land. By this the Jewish people are most evidently intended, and therefore the whole verse may be understood as predicting the destruction of the Jews; and is a presumptive proof that the Apocalypse was written before the final overthrow of the Jewish state.

See, you don't even have to be a full preterist to understand that verse in a 1st century context.

Too bad that in the 1st century these folks didn't have Adam Clarke to tell them what this Scripture (and maybe even Acts 1:11) really meant.


HankD

 

[Grasshopper]

A little while - Almost 2000 years so far - less than 2 days to God.

HankD

Wow, just think how long that 1000 year MK is going to be.

But you missed, intentionally I'm sure, the point of that verse which was "will not tarry".

 

[asterisktom]

But why does it seem to us as a delay? Because the inspired writers lead their readers to believe it was soon. But if they understood "soon" through the filter of 2 Peter ,as you would have us do, then they would have understood that is "God's time" thus they would not have been expecting it necessarily anytime soon. Do you not see the problem?

It is interesting that the verse in 2nd Peter 3 is used to teach the exact opposite of the passage's intent: the fact that God is not slack (="will not tarry").

3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

The point of the passage is that, whether a fulfillment should take two or two thousand years, God will always be faithful to His promises. The passage itself says nothing about when judgment was to come.

The scoffers here, BTW, are the ones who argue for a futurist fulfillment - or indefinite postponement, not for the Preterist position.

To me it is also quite telling that so many quote this verse solely for the slackness element ("a day as a thousand years"), not for the soonness element ("a thousand years as one day").

 

[HankD]

The point of the passage is that, whether a fulfillment should take two or two thousand years, God will always be faithful to His promises. The passage itself says nothing about when judgment was to come.

In that we can agree Tom.

HankD

 

[Grasshopper]

Too bad that in the 1st century these folks didn't have Adam Clarke to tell them what this Scripture (and maybe even Acts 1:11) really meant.


HankD

Too bad they didn't have HankD to tell them to not take those time-statments literally.

 

[Eagle]

Joe 2:23 Be glad then, ye children of Zion, and rejoice in the LORD your God: for he hath given you the former rain moderately, and he will cause to come down for you the rain, the former rain, and the latter rain in the first month.
Joe 2:24 And the floors shall be full of wheat, and the fats shall overflow with wine and oil.
Joe 2:25 And I will restore to you the years that the locust hath eaten, the cankerworm, and the caterpiller, and the palmerworm, my great army which I sent among you.
Joe 2:26 And ye shall eat in plenty, and be satisfied, and praise the name of the LORD your God, that hath dealt wondrously with you: and my people shall never be ashamed.
Joe 2:27 And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed.
Joe 2:28 And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:
Joe 2:29 And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.
Joe 2:30 And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.
Joe 2:31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.
Joe 2:32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.

Pertaining to the OP, is this not an example of present day (current at the time Joel wrote this) "comfort" being offered to Israel - yet at the same time was filled with prophetic language which Peter interprets as being fulfilled, in Acts 2 - hundreds of years later?

I am not trying to open another can of worms - but this seems relevant.

 

[lastday]

Lastday

Tom Riggle writes:

The scoffers here (In 2 Peter), BTW, are the ones who argue for a futurist fulfillment - or indefinite postponement, not for the Preterist position.

Grasshopper wrote:

ONE: Too bad they didn't have HankD to tell them to not take those time-statments literally.

TWO: Of course one slight problem, according to Rev 11 it seems the Jews are already in control of Jerusalem:..and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
There in their Temple and its outer court and they are worshipping there. Doesn't look like the Gentiles are trodding it down yet. Better come up with another timeline.

The Gentiles will control the grounds around the Temple to the very End.

There is one timeline...the one that ends with "Jesus coming in the clouds".
When John accuses a person as being "of the antichrist"; one who rejects/ denies the "Doctrine of Christ"...denies that "He is coming in the flesh" (erchomenon en the sarki) he (just like Jesus) used the PRESENT PARTICIPLE for what "men will see (including Caiaphas) when He comes in great power and glory". Matt.24:30; Matt.26:64; Luke 21:27; So John in 2 John 1:7 !

If John was referring to those why deny that "Christ had come in the flesh", he would have used the aorist tense, indicative mood (aylthen; has come)!!

Therefore the "scoffers (in these last days) who deny Christ is coming in the flesh" are NOT FUTURISTS, as Tom incorrectly assumes, but those who deny
that He is still "about (mello) to come" which is another way to say His coming is "near" and "soon" and that when "all these things happenS, that DAY will be sudden, like snare coming on ALL the inhabitants on ALL the face of ALL the earth"!!! Luke 21:34-35.
Mel

 

[asterisktom]

Pertaining to the OP, is this not an example of present day (current at the time Joel wrote this) "comfort" being offered to Israel - yet at the same time was filled with prophetic language which Peter interprets as being fulfilled, in Acts 2 - hundreds of years later?

I am not trying to open another can of worms - but this seems relevant.

Giving a quick answer for now, Eagle, just off the top of my head I would say that the phrase "and it shall come to pass afterward" is the place to focus on. Everything before that seems to speak of present comfort (or soon-coming comfort). From 28 on refers to what happened at Pentecost, per Peter's application of this passage to that event.

 

[HankD]

Pertaining to the OP, is this not an example of present day (current at the time Joel wrote this) "comfort" being offered to Israel - yet at the same time was filled with prophetic language which Peter interprets as being fulfilled, in Acts 2 - hundreds of years later?

I am not trying to open another can of worms - but this seems relevant.

From the dispensational point of view it was partially fulfilled Eagle.

Acts 7

19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.​

The Hebrew nation resisted and ultimately rejected the Gospel of the Great Commission. The apostles then turned to the Gentiles.

Acts 13

46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.
48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.​

The Day of the Lord and the Times of Refreshing have yet to come.​

The remainder of the prophecies of Joel will be fulfilled at the Second Coming of Christ.​

HankD

 

[lastday]

Lastday

Eagle,

Pertaining to the OP, is this not an example of present day (current at the time Joel wrote this) "comfort" being offered to Israel - yet at the same time was filled with prophetic language which Peter interprets as being fulfilled, in Acts 2 - hundreds of years later?

Excellent reference and a pertinent "inverse parallel" to our present concern.
Tom is correct that Joel predicted the "Signs" that Peter affirmed had occurred
at the Cross. But the promised result was not fulfilled THEN that "God will also
rescue survivors and restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem and destroy
the enemies of Israel, HIS People, HIS inheritance, whom these enemies had
scattered among the nations". Joel 2:32 to 3:2.

The Preterist view short-changes God's promise that He will "relent and forgive and no longer remember the sins of Israel and Judah; but will unite
them a 'second time' as His own People"! That aspect of the "New Covenant with respect to their restoration as His People after 'two days'" (2000 years)
is irrevocable!! But will not go into effect until all their enemies have been destroyed by Christ...on the Day of God Almighty...at Armageddon!!!
Mel

 

[Logos1]

Lastday misses the mark on Armageddon!!!

But will not go into effect until all their enemies have been destroyed by Christ...on the Day of God Almighty...at Armageddon!!!
Mel

Lastday you have badly mistaken what Armageddon is—you have fallen into the futurist trap that it is a battle at the end of time. The bible is clear that Armageddon is not a battle at all it is a gathering place for armies.

Let’s look at the only bible verse which uses the term Armageddon

Revelation 16:16
And they assembled them at the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.

The Romans did in fact gather their forces for battle at Armageddon prior to their campaign through Judea.

“Your understanding of the inspiration of Scripture is utterly astounding!” Mel

I’m always flattered by your kind words of gratitude Mel.

 

[lastday]

Logos, the Spiritualizer,

Armageddon is not a "battle"; but a total "slaughter" on the "Day of Almighty God"!
Armies of Rome came from West of Jerusalem; Armageddons come from far East!!
Israel is rescued and begins to reign over all the nations from that same Day !!!
Mel

 

[kyredneck]

....Israel.....to reign over all the nations....
Mel

.....and therein lies the sheer idiocy of the Israel Cult.

.....do they ever have you, and myriads of others likewise deluded, exactly where they want you........

It is the height of lunacy.

 

[lastday]

Redneck,

I notice everytime a person cannot respond with Scripture, he succumbs to "lunacy"!
So maybe you think God is deluded to promise "deliverance to all the people of Israel!!
If you even allowed the "possibility" that I am not an idiot, you would get my respect!!!
Mel

 

[Logos1]

Hi kyredneck,

OK in answer to your question.

The word generation used in both instances (Matt 24:34 & Matt 1:17) is the same except it is plural (genea vs geneai) . Strong’s G1074 is used in each example.

Now to go a step further contrast that (genea) of the generation contemporary to Christ to the futurist claim that the term generation as used in reference to future events means the Jewish race thus enabling them to claim it means events thousands of years into the future as opposed to the contemporary generation of Christ. In such an example (Matt 23:36) the greek is not genea, but genos (Strong G1085). This would better denotes a race of people. It is not used in examples such as Matt 23:36.

There is just no legit way to get around the simple truth that when Christ said this generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled it takes us directly to 70AD, not thousands of years into the future.

“Your understanding of the inspiration of Scripture is utterly astounding!” Mel

Thanks for your wonderful support Mel!

 

[lastday]

Lastday

Logos the Spiritualizer,
You are wrong:

In such an example (Matt 23:36) the greek is not genea (1074), but genos (Strong G1085)

The Greek in Matt.23:36 IS genea (#1074)!
In fact, all three references you give are #1074!!
A blatant example of twisting the truth to support falsehood!!!

Jesus has in mind ALL generations of Israel to the "End of Gentile times"!
These generations will continue until the "Gentiles times are fulfilled"!!
They "see all these things happening" on the Day Christ appears!!!

Christ "comes in the flesh" at the End of Gentile times to destroy enemies!
Messiah comes in glory to "deliver Israel and Judah from total destruction"!!
"Israel and Judah, delivered, will know the Lord...from least to the greatest"!!!
Mel