This just in, Futurists. Nineveh will be destroyed!

[asterisktom]

Sure:

Quote:
They are committed to a system. They seem to honor that system (dispensationalism) more than they honor the Bible.

Very ugly words.

The key words here is "seem". They have all these plain statements from Christ and Paul and John that promise a return within a generation. (Shall I list them?) And they try to explain away that plain meaning.

My saying that forthrightly is not meanness. It is love. Love for the truth and for them. It is love for God's Word. (And, no, I don't say that others don't love God's Word also)

But I wish someone would have shown me this option of Preterism when I was a young impressionable Christian in the 70s, clutching my Hal Lindsay and David Wilkerson books. They would have spared me a lot of wasted time and energy. That is why I will keep plugging away at this, on the one hand showing positively what Preterism and the present Kingdom really is, on the other hand delving into the necessary negative, seeming to be quite ugly, but praying for a beautiful result.

 

[mandym]

The key words here is "seem". They have all these plain statements from Christ and Paul and John that promise a return within a generation. (Shall I list them?) And they try to explain away that plain meaning.

My saying that forthrightly is not meanness. It is love. Love for the truth and for them. It is love for God's Word. (And, no, I don't say that others don't love God's Word also)

But I wish someone would have shown me this option of Preterism when I was a young impressionable Christian in the 70s, clutching my Hal Lindsay and David Wilkerson books. They would have spared me a lot of wasted time and energy. That is why I will keep plugging away at this, on the one hand showing positively what Preterism and the present Kingdom really is, on the other hand delving into the necessary negative, seeming to be quite ugly, but praying for a beautiful result.

And maybe they just come to those conclusions honestly rather than how you suggest. I am not really a true dispy although it is clear to me God deals with Israel and the church differently. But being shown the option of preterism and attacking them are two different things. Your accusation is not love. You could have presented the same truth without the unnecessary and over the top accusation.

 

[asterisktom]

And maybe they just come to those conclusions honestly rather than how you suggest. I am not really a true dispy although it is clear to me God deals with Israel and the church differently. But being shown the option of preterism and attacking them are two different things. Your accusation is not love. You could have presented the same truth without the unnecessary and over the top accusation.

Alright, here is nothing new here. I am bad. I get it. Like I said, I disagree with this assessment.

I never said they were dishonest. Don't put words in my mouth. And attacking a system, pulling it down, is necessary to putting a different system in place.

Feel free to add whatever you want here, but I think I am done here. No offense, I hope.

 

[mandym]

Alright, here is nothing new here. I am bad. I get it. Like I said, I disagree with this assessment.

I never said they were dishonest. Don't put words in my mouth. And attacking a system, pulling it down, is necessary to putting a different system in place.

Feel free to add whatever you want here, but I think I am done here. No offense, I hope.

You did not just attack a system you attacked the people who hold to that system. Whatever your implication was it was about the people and not just the system. You suggested that they will not believe your version because they are holding on to a system. There is a clear implication about the people here. That is an attack.

No offense.

 

[DHK]

The key words here is "seem". They have all these plain statements from Christ and Paul and John that promise a return within a generation. (Shall I list them?) And they try to explain away that plain meaning.

This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be created shall praise the LORD. (Psalms 102:18)
--Which generations? Which people that shall praise the Lord?

To hear the groaning of the prisoner; to loose those that are appointed to death; To declare the name of the LORD in Zion, and his praise in Jerusalem; (Psalms 102:20-21)
--The groaning of the prisoner?? Those that are appointed to death?? Perhaps 70 A.D.
--Declaring the name of the Lord in Zion? When? In the time of Christ? Maybe. During the Millennial Kingdom still to come—more probable.

When the people are gathered together, and the kingdoms, to serve the LORD. (Psalms 102:22)
--Haven’t seen this yet. It must still be future, as are the events in verse 21.

But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, (Matthew 11:16)

The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. (Matthew 12:41)
--The men of Nineveh SHALL rise in judgment with this generation.
That hasn’t happened yet. He obviously is speaking of a future event; a future judgment, and not that of the destruction of Jerusalem. It did not involve the men of Nineveh.

The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here. (Matthew 12:42)

The queen of the south…the judgment…this generation. It is not speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem, but rather of a future judgment. The queen of the South or Sheba was not present in 70 A.D.

Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. (Matthew 23:36)
--This was the condemnation of Jesus against the Pharisees. And this condemnation was fulfilled. I don’t have any problem here.

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. (Matthew 24:34)
“This generation
Gr. "genea," the primary definition of which is, "race, kind, family, stock, breed." (So all lexicons.) That the word is used in this sense because none of "these things," i.e. the world-wide preaching of the kingdom, the great tribulation, the return of the Lord in visible glory, and the regathering of the elect, occurred at the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, A.D. 70. The promise is, therefore, that the generation--nation, or family of Israel--will be preserved unto "these things"; a promise wonderfully fulfilled to this day.” (Scofield)

 

[Iconoclast]

I didn't short circuit I saw it as he meant it skewed to the preterist point of view.

It started a good debate that what it was meant to do. I notice you didn't comment in it until now. BTW did I read you to say you were amil now I see partial preterist, what is the difference in amil and preterist?

REVMAC
Hello. I was originally taught the pre=mill dispensational system...getting tapes and book recommendations from Dallas Theological Seminary, and Baptist Bible college.
I know the system and can still teach it of I had to. Only i do not believe it is the best view.
I am currently in between....Amill, and post mill in my understanding.
Matt.24 was fulfilled in 70ad.....and rev up to chapter 20.....

Historic premill would not disturb me...but seems not necessary...but I am fine with whatever the Lord has in store for His people.
I did not read through this whole thread [My post was made without reference to any responses..}...just taking a coffee break now.
I just liked the OP and was happy to see a fresh "topic" or two...as Tom has started several good threads here.
I will interact with any questions you have ..just be patient and i will get back to you....

Studying out the book of Hebrews over a two year period...moved me away from what i was told was rock solid truth....

 

[Logos1]

Thanks DHK for your Preterist endorsement

you just can't prove he didn't return in 70 AD.

it is called a universal negative which is a logical fallacy.

In order for anyone to prove that he did not come in 70 A.D. he would have to develop a time machine and go back in time to that era. And then he would have to search the world over. He would have to look in every forest, wilderness, in every city, village, house, in every mountain, on every hilltop, in every square inch of the entire world--both known and unknown to prove that he did not come in 70 A.D. It is impossible to prove.

A universal negative is a logical fallacy. To claim such is illogical. Your entire premise then rests on a premise that is faulty to begin with, that is impossible to prove. Sorry, but this is like a fairy tale, when examined purely from a logical and scientific viewpoint. It has no grounds for factual evidence.

Thanks DHK you have proved my point once and for all!

I knew I could count on you or the good revmwc or JF to take the bait!

I wanted you to say it first and not me.

You admit you cannot prove Christ didn’t come in 70 AD.

It doesn’t matter the reason—you can cry all you want about universal negatives, logical fallacies, scientific view points, and time machines—it’s all irrelevant. The fact remains that you can’t prove Christ didn’t come back in 70 AD. That means you have to allow for the possibility that he did. You have admitted that the Preterist position could be right. You have validated the possibility that Christ returned in 70 AD.

Now that you have admitted to the possibility that Preterism could be right and your system has failed you for 2,000 years don’t you think it is time to stop beating yourself up with futurism and give Preterism a legitimate look and not just write it off because it disagrees with your old belief.

You have been a pleasure to work with DHK. :applause:

I look forward to our future work together.

 

[Logos1]

Good revmwc please see the admission of dhk above

Why don't you prove He did?

My good sir--please note dhk's admission above that you can't prove Christ didn't return in 70 AD.

Now that we have established that as a legitimate possibility I invite you to exam preterism with unbiased eyes and ask if you want to blindly cling to a system that has offered you nothing but abject failure and disappointment for 2,000 years.

Your old system has never offered anybody down through the ages anything but disappointment, bewilderment, embarrassment, failure, and has no hope of getting better in the future.

Since dhk has established that preterism could be right--don't you want to try it without all the preconceived notions and give it an honest look.

At worse it couldn't be any more wrong that your system is and at best you could find truth and victory in Christ!

 

[Winman]

My good sir--please note dhk's admission above that you can't prove Christ didn't return in 70 AD.

Now that we have established that as a legitimate possibility I invite you to exam preterism with unbiased eyes and ask if you want to blindly cling to a system that has offered you nothing but abject failure and disappointment for 2,000 years.

Your old system has never offered anybody down through the ages anything but disappointment, bewilderment, embarrassment, failure, and has no hope of getting better in the future.

Since dhk has established that preterism could be right--don't you want to try it without all the preconceived notions and give it an honest look.

At worse it couldn't be any more wrong that your system is and at best you could find truth and victory in Christ!

It is not up to DHK to prove Jesus didn't come in 70 A.D., you are the one claiming he did, so it is your responsibility to prove he did.

This is how it works in a court of law (or is supposed to), the defendant is not required to prove that he is innocent, the prosecution has the burden of proving he is guilty, as they made the claim and brought the charge.

This technique has been used by psychics, mediums, and faith healers throughout history, they claim you cannot prove they are not speaking to the dead, or have power to heal.

You claim Jesus returned in 70 A.D., prove it.

 

[Robert Snow]

I will say it again, and it is without any rancor, but with conviction: Futurists are committed to a system. It skews their perception of what would otherwise be plain statements from God's Word.

Why would this apply only to "Futurists" and not to Preterists as well? Is there some reason that only those who you disagree with are the ones "committed to a system?"

I believe the vast majority of threads you have either started or participated in deal with Preterism. Does this not show that you also are committed to a system?

 

[Winman]

My comments below. As a convenience to those who are going just skip over the passage here I put the verses in blue. Please notice the words underlined.

Nahum 1:1 - 11.
1 The burden against Nineveh. The book of the vision of Nahum the Elkoshite.

2 God is jealous, and the LORD avenges;
The LORD avenges and is furious.
The LORD will take vengeance on His adversaries,
And He reserves wrath for His enemies;

3 The LORD is slow to anger and great in power,
And will not at all acquit the wicked.
The LORD has His way
In the whirlwind and in the storm,
And the clouds are the dust of His feet.

4 He rebukes the sea and makes it dry,
And dries up all the rivers.
Bashan and Carmel wither,
And the flower of Lebanon wilts.

5 The mountains quake before Him,
The hills melt,
And the earth heaves at His presence,
Yes, the world and all who dwell in it.

6 Who can stand before His indignation?
And who can endure the fierceness of His anger?
His fury is poured out like fire,
And the rocks are thrown down by Him.

7 The LORD is good,
A stronghold in the day of trouble;
And He knows those who trust in Him.

8 But with an overflowing flood
He will make an utter end of its place,
And darkness will pursue His enemies.

9 What do you conspire against the LORD?
He will make an utter end of it.
Affliction will not rise up a second time.

10 For while tangled like thorns,
And while drunken like drunkards,
They shall be devoured like stubble fully dried.

11 From you comes forth one
Who plots evil against the LORD,
A wicked counselor.

The reason I gave this post the title I did is because, like JesusFan and several others here, I too am waiting for these events that literally did not happen:

Hills did not melt yet.
The Ninevites did not get burned up like stubble.
The sea was not made dry.
The rivers were not made dry.

Clearly these events are still coming. I guess, first, the Ninevites will have to return to their physical land - just like the Jews.

Actually, these events happened long time ago. To a people who no longer exist.

Why is it so hard for Futurists to understand that the same Bible, using the same kind of imagery in Zechariah and Revelation, is to be understood in the same manner?
I know why. They are committed to a system. They seem to honor that system (dispensationalism) more than they honor the Bible.

I don't see verses 2-7 as speaking of the destruction of Nineveh, but simply of the Lord. Verses 8-10 do seem to speak directly of the destruction of Nineveh, while verse 11 seems to speak of the future Assyrian spoken of in Isaiah chapters 10 and 11, quoted by Paul in 2 Thessalonians.

But Nineveh was overthown by a literal flood, and the city was burned.

In 612 B.C. Nabopolassar united the Babylonian army with an army of Medes and Scythians and led a campaign which captured the Assyrian citadels in the North. The Babylonian army laid siege to Nineveh, but the walls of the city were too strong for battering rams, so they decided to try and starve the people out. A famous oracle had been given that "Nineveh should never be taken until the river became its enemy." After a three month siege, "rain fell in such abundance that the waters of the Tigris inundated part of the city and overturned one of its walls for a distance of twenty stades. Then the King, convinced that the oracle was accomplished and despairing of any means of escape, to avoid falling alive into the enemy's hands constructed in his palace an immense funeral pyre, placed on it his gold and silver and his royal robes, and then, shutting himself up with his wives and eunuchs in a chamber formed in the midst of the pile, disappeared in the flames. Nineveh opened its gates to the besiegers, but this tardy submission did not save the proud city. It was pillaged and burned, and then razed to the ground so completely as to evidence the implacable hatred enkindled in the minds of subject nations by the fierce and cruel Assyrian government." (Lenormant and E. Chevallier, The Rise and Fall of Assyria).

"Nineveh was laid waste as ruthlessly and completely as her kings had once ravaged Susa and Babylon; the city was put to the torch, the population was slaughtered or enslaved, and the palace so recently built by Ashurbanipal was sacked and destroyed. At one blow Assyria disappeared from history. Nothing remained of her except certain tactics and weapons of war ...The Near East remembered her for a while as a merciless unifier of a dozen lesser states; and the Jews recalled Nineveh vengefully as 'the bloody city, full of lies and robbery.' In a little while all but the mightiest of the Great Kings were forgotten, and all their royal palaces were in ruins under the drifting sands. Two hundred years after its capture, Xenophon's Ten Thousand marched over the mounds that had been Nineveh, and never suspected that these were the site of the ancient metropolis that had ruled half the world. Not a stone remained visible of all the temples with which Assyria's pious warriors had sought to beautify their greatest capital. Even Ashur, the everlasting god, was dead." (Will Durant, Our Oriental Heritage, pp. 283, 284).

So, I believe verses 8-10 were fulfilled, verse 11 is future.

 

[HankD]

The key words here is "seem". They have all these plain statements from Christ and Paul and John that promise a return within a generation. (Shall I list them?) And they try to explain away that plain meaning.

Seems to be a lot of repitition of beliefs on both sides so I'll continue on in that venue:

Admitedly the return of Christ in the lifetime of the Apostles was a very real possibility.

However and for the sake of the debate and assuming it's a valid assumption, preterists then have to deal with the fact that the plain language of the Scriptures are clear concerning the manner in which He will return.

Christ will return bodily in the atmosphere, every eye will see Him (and His pre-ceding sign) with multitudes of global events to be fulfilled (from both OT and NT books) as of yet unfilfilled (unless spiritualized).

Scripture lists will be forthcoming if desired (yes, most are weary of the exercise).

Historically speaking the Apostolic and Early Church Fathers who either spanned the AD70 date or were in close post-time proximity of AD70 will be re-quoted if necessary to show that they looked for a future bodily return of Christ (in the same manner as He left - in His body) as well as a bodily resurrection of those who followed after (we shall be like Him when He appears).

In my research I have found no definitive preterist point of view among the ECF.

Bottom line: the preterist view has perceived problems as well as futurist view.

It's a matter of choice. To me preterism by far has the greater share of perceived difficulties with which one must deal.

My latest unanswered question being - why is planet earth still plagued by sin and death and the created universe still in the bondage of corruption if all is fulfilled and Christ has destroyed the works of the devil?

Why?

How long will this go on and when will it end if all is fulfilled?

Romans 8

21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.​

1 John 3
1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.​

HankD

 

[asterisktom]

Why would this apply only to "Futurists" and not to Preterists as well? Is there some reason that only those who you disagree with are the ones "committed to a system?"

I believe the vast majority of threads you have either started or participated in deal with Preterism. Does this not show that you also are committed to a system?

No, I am not committed to Preterism in the sense that you mean. Within the Preterist movement there are varying beliefs that I don't follow, just as there are varying beliefs within Calvinism, DoG, Non-Cal, and whatever group. I am constantly looking at Scripture and writing about what I see. ANd, as sometimes happens, I find better application for m Scripture form someone else, I change accordingly.

But the vast majority of futurists do not change. Consider this: Almost all Preterists came from the ranks of futurism. In my case, I was a futurist for over thirty years. But none of the futurists (that I know of) used to be Preterist. Why? Why is it only one way? The Preterists are willing to change as their knowledge base changes.

Now about the "vast majority" of my posts dealing with Preterism. Posts are very much response-generated. I Write something. I get response like "Typical Preterist blablabla. So then I am forced to answer more in a Preterist vein to defend my original post.

Also, to you Preterism is an eschatology topic. But for a Preterist it carries over quite thoroughly into Christology and many other aspects of theology. I want to write "perfusely" but that is probably not a word. It perfuses (seeps, permeates) into all of Christianity. It is not just AD 70, but the outworking of the truth that the Kingdom is spiritual and we, its citizens, are spiritual.

I don't focus on the AD 70 aspect. Look at my posts now. I started four threads with lengthy opening posts on Hebrews 1:1-3: believers as prophets, priests, and kings; and two on various aspects of the Greek word katargeo. Also, the posts on the date of Revelation are not strictly speaking, Preterist. Schaff, for instance, who changed his view to an earlier date for Rev., was certainly not Preterist.

However the best short answer, Robert, is just to avoid my posts. Or even put me on ignore.

 

[asterisktom]

I don't see verses 2-7 as speaking of the destruction of Nineveh, but simply of the Lord. Verses 8-10 do seem to speak directly of the destruction of Nineveh, while verse 11 seems to speak of the future Assyrian spoken of in Isaiah chapters 10 and 11, quoted by Paul in 2 Thessalonians.

But Nineveh was overthown by a literal flood, and the city was burned.



So, I believe verses 8-10 were fulfilled, verse 11 is future.

A classic example of commitment to a system. You have no indication in the text that there is a break in time between verses 10 and 11.

 

[asterisktom]

REVMAC
Hello. I was originally taught the pre=mill dispensational system...getting tapes and book recommendations from Dallas Theological Seminary, and Baptist Bible college.
I know the system and can still teach it of I had to. Only i do not believe it is the best view.
I am currently in between....Amill, and post mill in my understanding.
Matt.24 was fulfilled in 70ad.....and rev up to chapter 20.....

Historic premill would not disturb me...but seems not necessary...but I am fine with whatever the Lord has in store for His people.
I did not read through this whole thread [My post was made without reference to any responses..}...just taking a coffee break now.
I just liked the OP and was happy to see a fresh "topic" or two...as Tom has started several good threads here.
I will interact with any questions you have ..just be patient and i will get back to you....

Studying out the book of Hebrews over a two year period...moved me away from what i was told was rock solid truth....

Hi Iconoclast. It was during my Bible study I was leading through Hebrews that really cemented my non-futurists views. It really is all laid out there. I believe that this book should be studied more than it is. It is ironic that the very people who speak often about our being replacement theologists shy away from that book that has their name in the title. I wonder how many hits I would get even here in BB if I searched the word "Hebrews" as opposed to a term like "Revelation" or "Matthew".

What also happened when I went through Hebrews, though I wasn't really aware of it at the time, was a growing understanding of the basis of Preterism, and that it really was a reasonable, not a heretical nor even heterodox, framework.

 

[asterisktom]

Seems to be a lot of repitition of beliefs on both sides so I'll continue on in that venue:

Admitedly the return of Christ in the lifetime of the Apostles was a very real possibility.

However and for the sake of the debate and assuming it's a valid assumption, preterists then have to deal with the fact that the plain language of the Scriptures are clear concerning the manner in which He will return.

Christ will return bodily in the atmosphere, every eye will see Him (and His pre-ceding sign) with multitudes of global events to be fulfilled (from both OT and NT books) as of yet unfilfilled (unless spiritualized).

Scripture lists will be forthcoming if desired (yes, most are weary of the exercise).

Historically speaking the Apostolic and Early Church Fathers who either spanned the AD70 date or were in close post-time proximity of AD70 will be re-quoted if necessary to show that they looked for a future bodily return of Christ (in the same manner as He left - in His body) as well as a bodily resurrection of those who followed after (we shall be like Him when He appears).

In my research I have found no definitive preterist point of view among the ECF.

Bottom line: the preterist view has perceived problems as well as futurist view.

It's a matter of choice. To me preterism by far has the greater share of perceived difficulties with which one must deal.

My latest unanswered question being - why is planet earth still plagued by sin and death and the created universe still in the bondage of corruption if all is fulfilled and Christ has destroyed the works of the devil?

Why?

How long will this go on and when will it end if all is fulfilled?

Romans 8

21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.​

1 John 3
1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.​

HankD

Good morning Hank,

I do want to answer some more from this post, but my time is up now. However I will tell you right now that I am staying away from posting on the ECF. Not because they aren't important, but because I would rather focus on the Bible.

Two short points, and that is we need to look into just what the Bible means by "death" (which I believe, in the pertinent passages, is separation from God) and also what is meant by "being like Him" (= Christlikeness).

 

[Winman]

A classic example of commitment to a system. You have no indication in the text that there is a break in time between verses 10 and 11.

I don't have a system, I know of dispensationalism, but I am not big on it.

I simply told you how these verses impress me. Verse 1 is of course about Nineveh. But verses 2-7 could be speaking of God at any time, there are many such verses as these in scripture.

Verses 8-10 do seem to be speaking of the destruction of Nineveh.

Verse 11 seems future, because it has already been said that Nineveh was destroyed in verses 8 and 9. Plus, I already knew of the predicted "Assyrian".

And history shows that Nineveh was destroyed as these scriptures say.

 

[DHK]

My good sir--please note dhk's admission above that you can't prove Christ didn't return in 70 AD.

Now that we have established that as a legitimate possibility I invite you to exam preterism with unbiased eyes and ask if you want to blindly cling to a system that has offered you nothing but abject failure and disappointment for 2,000 years.

Your old system has never offered anybody down through the ages anything but disappointment, bewilderment, embarrassment, failure, and has no hope of getting better in the future.

Since dhk has established that preterism could be right--don't you want to try it without all the preconceived notions and give it an honest look.

At worse it couldn't be any more wrong that your system is and at best you could find truth and victory in Christ!

You claim that Christ came in 70 A.D. Then prove it.
If I claim that Nero word a 3 piece suit made by Gucci, then who has the responsibility of proving it?
Your claim is just as foolish, sad to say.

 

[revmwc]

My good sir--please note dhk's admission above that you can't prove Christ didn't return in 70 AD.

Now that we have established that as a legitimate possibility I invite you to exam preterism with unbiased eyes and ask if you want to blindly cling to a system that has offered you nothing but abject failure and disappointment for 2,000 years.

Your old system has never offered anybody down through the ages anything but disappointment, bewilderment, embarrassment, failure, and has no hope of getting better in the future.

Since dhk has established that preterism could be right--don't you want to try it without all the preconceived notions and give it an honest look.

At worse it couldn't be any more wrong that your system is and at best you could find truth and victory in Christ!

I believe the burden fell to you to show when HE came. If 1 Thesalonians 4 has been fulfilled then there would have been thousands of bodies laying in the streets if the body doesn't go withe the believer. If the bodies went then there would have been 1000's who disappeard in Asia Mnor. Or was it that Christ just came for the Jews in Israel and not for the whole church. The promise was that when he came for the church that the dead would rise first then we which were alive and remain would go with them and meet them in the air. Who would have propagated the Gospel? The churches in Asia Minor would have been emptied, then John in revelation said 144, 000 Jews made up of 12,000 from each specific tribe he mentioned would be saved and for 7 years they would testify in Jerusalem, but wait they was no more Jerusalem in those days. So the burden of proof in on you none of that happened. The churches in Asia remained and the Gospel continued to be spread as Matthew 28 was commanded.

Prove He came with Historic evidence thart these churches ceased and when these 144,000 Jews 12, 000 from each tribe testified. Also show where the two witnesses came and were killed laying in the streets of Jerusalem and the whole world saw them as John also said in Revelation. Then too you must show when the Abomination which maketh desolate stood in the Temple for 3 1/2 years as Daniel prophisied and Jesus must occur before His return. I am sure you have Historic and scripture to back all these event up.

I just proved by these there is no evidence all these events occured in Asia Minor as Jerusalem was sacked but His return is to be for ALL believers not just the Jewish ones.

So please prove it occured. Since you clainm it did all this evidence should be available.

 

[asterisktom]

I believe the burden fell to you to show when HE came. If 1 Thesalonians 4 has been fulfilled then there would have been thousands of bodies laying in the streets if the body doesn't go withe the believer. If the bodies went then there would have been 1000's who disappeard in Asia Mnor. Or was it that Christ just came for the Jews in Israel and not for the whole church. The promise was that when he came for the church that the dead would rise first then we which were alive and remain would go with them and meet them in the air. Who would have propagated the Gospel? The churches in Asia Minor would have been emptied, then John in revelation said 144, 000 Jews made up of 12,000 from each specific tribe he mentioned would be saved and for 7 years they would testify in Jerusalem, but wait they was no more Jerusalem in those days. So the burden of proof in on you none of that happened. The churches in Asia remained and the Gospel continued to be spread as Matthew 28 was commanded.

Prove He came with Historic evidence thart these churches ceased and when these 144,000 Jews 12, 000 from each tribe testified. Also show where the two witnesses came and were killed laying in the streets of Jerusalem and the whole world saw them as John also said in Revelation. Then too you must show when the Abomination which maketh desolate stood in the Temple for 3 1/2 years as Daniel prophisied and Jesus must occur before His return. I am sure you have Historic and scripture to back all these event up.

I just proved by these there is no evidence all these events occured in Asia Minor as Jerusalem was sacked but His return is to be for ALL believers not just the Jewish ones.

So please prove it occured. Since you clainm it did all this evidence should be available.

All of this boils down to: If the spiritual interpretation of you Preterists is true, prove it by literal evidence.

Spiritual.
Literal.