HisWitness
New Member
Can i ask you a question--will Hell be in the presence of God ?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Tracing the Origins of Coming on the Clouds
- Thread starter Logos1
- Start date
Can i ask you a question--will Hell be in the presence of God ?
HisWitness
New Member
Jesus destroyed SOUL DEATH at the Judgement and Resurrection around AD 70--Before that time those who died bodily also their SOUL died in the Grave(Hell)
there was NO remembrance in Hell(grave) soul and body DEAD.
SOUL DEATH(final enemy to be DESTROYED)
scripture says the SOUL that sinneth IT(soul) SHALL DIE.
This was the DEATH from Adam to all who sinned
This is the first time that I have started reading this thread. Just reading the last few pages or so, I have seen a lot more insults from you then I have seen Scripture. And OR, JoJ, and others have pointed it out. OR seems to have a point in telling you:
Good advice?
Notice in the rest of your post, though you allege to make scriptural points you haven't backed one of them up with Scripture as you have supposed to have been doing. Much of what you say therefore is false.
Perhaps you watch too much TV--Star Wars, or super hero based cartoons.
What does the Scripture say:
Acts 1:9 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 stedfastly 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.
--He was taken up.
--A cloud received him.
--He went up and they beheld him.
--They were still gazing into heaven when angels spoke to them.
--The same Jesus who they saw ascend into heaven will return in the same manner in which they saw him go into heaven.
I believe this refers to the rapture.
Now if this is what you irreverently call Jesus "flying through the air," as you deny the ascension of Christ, then I don't believe you are Orthodox in your beliefs. The ascension is one of the fundamentals of the faith. Those who deny it have often been declared heretics. It is a vital belief in orthodox Christianity. It is the time between the resurrection and the ascension, these two great events that gave opportunity for the apostles plus over 500 others to be witnesses of the physical resurrected body of the Lord Jesus Christ.
"In your opinion," Please clarify.
Jesus said three times in Revelation 22 "I come quickly," but he hasn't come yet. It is a relevant word. The entire Bible is relevant to each one of us in each generation. Paul fully expected Christ to come during his lifetime, but he didn't. The disciples in Acts 1 asked Jesus:
Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
--They thought the time was "soon." But "soon" to them was not "soon" to Jesus. God's time frame is different. His thoughts are higher than our thoughts. God's time is not our time. God works outside of time. Therefore Jesus said:
Acts 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
--It is not for us to know the time. Even if the Holy Spirit has inspired "soon," "shortly," or other such words, they are only relative to our understanding of Scripture, and not to be imposed to our understanding of history. History can be wrong. It is God's story--His Story.
"In fact, there have been about 150 recorded predictions for the End of Days. Thankfully, none of them have rung true."
You can read about some of them here:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...vious-predictions-proved-wrong-163956854.html
Again, no scripture; just opinion.
Mark 8:38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.
--Every generation since Christ has been adulterous and sinful.
This is indeed his second coming, far different than the rapture. His coming will be sudden; in His glory or the glory of the Father, with the holy angels. At this coming it will be in judgment. There is no time given here. There is no evidence of a "soon" coming here; no time element except that it is imminent, or could be at any time--as a thief in the night.
2 Thessalonians 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.
--Another very descriptive account of the swift Second Coming of the Lord at a time when we know not. His coming will be in judgment. The rapture will be for the saints in comfort. (1Thes.4:16ff)
I just gave you two passages. Are you going to deny them? He is coming in the glory of his father with the holy angels? You still think he will be invisible? There is a thread here on logic. Do you think you should partake?
Verse 10 above states that when he comes..."to be admired in all them that believe."
--Can you admire something that is invisible?
There are many more scriptures, but I will stick with just these two for now.
That is totally subjective reasoning. There are very, very few commentators, and very little evidence that the book was written before 95-98 A.D. Your entire theory rests on this date which you have no proof for. All the evidence points for a late dating of the book. Only the preterists strain at every little bit of biased evidence that they can get their hands on to try to put the date of this book at before 70 A.D., simply to make their theology work. In the real world, people would be fired from their jobs for such bias and deviation from the objectiveness of the scientific method.
Here is what John said:
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.
--We know when we see Christ (for he shall come physically)
--We shall be like him. We will be raptured in a body like his.
--We will see the physically resurrected Christ, and we will have a body like his body in the resurrection which happens at the rapture. This is the first resurrection that Christ refers to--the resurrection of the just. It happens at the rapture.
Say Whaaaaa?????
I haven't heard much for you in the pages that I have read except for insults. This isn't a rebuttal or a defense. This is nothing but opinion; unsupported opinion; not a single verse from the Bible.
Can I quote OR again for you:
It is good advice, really!
Nope. Not me.
Preterism went down the drain long ago.
It is a denial of the fundamentals of the faith, or at least some of them.
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
DHK
Thanks much for an excellent rebuttal of Logos 1 and his posts. I doubt that your use of Scripture will rub off on him because he has none, not a single one to support his view, in my opinion.
Thanks much for an excellent rebuttal of Logos 1 and his posts. I doubt that your use of Scripture will rub off on him because he has none, not a single one to support his view, in my opinion.
I did a quick search, and this may be where Logos1 is getting his "over 100" figure: http://www.biblicalpreteristarchive.com/statements/101.htm
Of course there is no way I can interact with all of these statements here (or even on the BB) but I have to say the list is a complete mishmash of misunderstanding. It includes the manner ("quickly") statements of the book of Rev., the imminency (not immediacy) statements, etc. And of course my rebuttal of the preterist view that futurists have a time problem still stands, since preterists have the same problem.
At any rate, just to show what a mishmash the list is, it has 1 John 2:17 in there, "the world is passing away." So apparently the preterist of the website interprets this to think the physical world disappeared in 70 AD. What? Really? Funny, I never noticed I was floating in space! :tongue3:
HisWitness
New Member
how can you say those things were not for the time and life of the disciples of that day when jesus plainly told them--when YE(disciples) see these things happening,when YE(disciples) hear of these things comming,when YE(disciples)are taken and also some killed,and it deals with that same generation of that day that wasnt gonna pass away till ALL OF THOSE THINGS HE SPOKE WAS FULFILLED--the language and the message was to THEM(disciples of that time)something that wasnt in their time or day would have resulted in God telling John as he told Daniel to SHUT UP those things.
and you may already know that from the time of daniel to john was a shorter time than the time from john to ourday--so daniel to shut them up for it wasnt for his day or time--makes no sense at all to tell john NOT to shut up for the time was at hand(meaning they were for his day and time)
all this makes complete sense when looked at and the language is properly understood .
I believe that Christ clearly prophesied the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem, and that is what you are referring to in those passages. For example, Christ said that not one stone would be left on another in Matt. 24:2. This was literally fulfilled. I can't give you my source right now, but I've read that the gold of the temple melted in the inferno and leaked down between the stones, so the Roman soldiers literally took down every single stone to get the gold, thus literally fulfilling the words of Christ.
Since that and other prophecies of the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem were literally fulfilled, why shouldn't the prophecies of Christ's 2nd Coming be interpreted literally?
Preterism's main problem, IMO, is that it wants to interpret some prophecies literally and others figuratively. Yet as I showed in a thread some time ago (http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=71475), every single prophecy concerning Christ's first coming was fulfilled literally (born in Bethlehem, born of a virgin, lived in Egypt, etc., etc.), yet preterism wants to interpret the prophecies of His second coming figuratively and spiritually. That's very inconsistent.
Last edited by a moderator:
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
Jesus destroyed SOUL DEATH at the Judgement and Resurrection around AD 70--Before that time those who died bodily also their SOUL died in the Grave(Hell)
there was NO remembrance in Hell(grave) soul and body DEAD.
SOUL DEATH(final enemy to be DESTROYED)
scripture says the SOUL that sinneth IT(soul) SHALL DIE.
This was the DEATH from Adam to all who sinned
I thought from your initial post you were a "no-heller". It appears I was correct!
HisWitness
New Member
im just dealing with matthew 24 here not what the preterists do and dont
you didnt answer the whole question??
Jesus was talking to his disciples and telling them they would see and have part in all those things in matthew 24--did he not ?
the great tribulation and the resurrection(rapture) is in that also--as posted in a new thread i made on matthew 24
HisWitness
New Member
LOL how do you get im a no heller ?
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
You say in your next post that hell is the grave. When Jesus Christ returns both the sea and graves will give up their dead so the question is irrelevant!
HisWitness
New Member
also you failed to reply to the daniel being shut up and john not being shut up topic ?
HisWitness
New Member
Forgive me, but I'm not really sure what you are referring to in Matt. 24. What would the disciples have part in?im just dealing with matthew 24 here not what the preterists do and dont
you didnt answer the whole question??
Jesus was talking to his disciples and telling them they would see and have part in all those things in matthew 24--did he not ?
the great tribulation and the resurrection(rapture) is in that also--as posted in a new thread i made on matthew 24
Futurist seek to physicalize the return of Christ
John I admire how you have developed the weasel technique on the time statements—first you admit that futurism has a problem with the time statements—but then used the old ignore technique on that little conundrum—then you employed the false witness technique against the preterist view of time statements.
You try to redefine the time statement to suit your purposes—(that would be a slick maneuver if it wasn’t so obviously wrong)—by saying that preterism too has a problem because it said Christ would return soon and he didn’t return soon enough to satisfy that requirement the way you choose to define it.
Do you suppose we could venture an honest look at time statements or are novel ideas still permissible?
In Acts 2: 17 at the time of Pentecost we see that the current generation is living in the last days—meaning the last days of the Old Covenant. After 1,500 years or so the remaining life span of the current generation would obviously qualify as the last days. We are now 40 years out from 70 AD.
Then we progress to the last hour 1 John 2:18 probably written mid to late 60’s AD. Notice not hours, but hour—singular.
And, Revelation starts out by saying these things must quickly take place so we know the timing is imminent.
The bible itself testifies this can’t mean things will take place quickly once they start to happen as futurists have tortured the meaning because Daniel 12:4 is told to seal the book till the time of the end.
500 years pass
John writes Revelation 22:10 and Jesus tell him don’t seal the book because the time is near or hand in some translations (aw he didn’t even permit futurist to slander the word quickly there).
2000 years later futurists deny this sequence and attempt to hide from it in order to revive their dying false doctrine—but the truth just keeps on popping up.
Hence the timing issue is settled to every honest person—only those driving agendas would embarrass themselves by trying to argue with the inspired scripture on this.
So then we know—if Revelation is written in the 60’s then the events of 70 AD would square every bit of this. However, if Revelation were written in the 90’s there is not yet any historical event that could possible square it.
Since we know since Jesus told us in Luke 21:22 that His generation would not pass away till all things are written are fulfilled and Jerusalem’s fall is specifically part of those events mentioned then nothing else left written in prophecy can possibly left to be fulfilled after 70 AD.
Hence we are certain that Jesus returned in 70 AD and resurrection took place then. No way around it unless you want to call Jesus a liar.
Futurists can’t accept the teachings of Christ and seek to physicalize the return of Christ. Sad.
John I admire how you have developed the weasel technique on the time statements—first you admit that futurism has a problem with the time statements—but then used the old ignore technique on that little conundrum—then you employed the false witness technique against the preterist view of time statements.
You try to redefine the time statement to suit your purposes—(that would be a slick maneuver if it wasn’t so obviously wrong)—by saying that preterism too has a problem because it said Christ would return soon and he didn’t return soon enough to satisfy that requirement the way you choose to define it.
Do you suppose we could venture an honest look at time statements or are novel ideas still permissible?
In Acts 2: 17 at the time of Pentecost we see that the current generation is living in the last days—meaning the last days of the Old Covenant. After 1,500 years or so the remaining life span of the current generation would obviously qualify as the last days. We are now 40 years out from 70 AD.
Then we progress to the last hour 1 John 2:18 probably written mid to late 60’s AD. Notice not hours, but hour—singular.
And, Revelation starts out by saying these things must quickly take place so we know the timing is imminent.
The bible itself testifies this can’t mean things will take place quickly once they start to happen as futurists have tortured the meaning because Daniel 12:4 is told to seal the book till the time of the end.
500 years pass
John writes Revelation 22:10 and Jesus tell him don’t seal the book because the time is near or hand in some translations (aw he didn’t even permit futurist to slander the word quickly there).
2000 years later futurists deny this sequence and attempt to hide from it in order to revive their dying false doctrine—but the truth just keeps on popping up.
Hence the timing issue is settled to every honest person—only those driving agendas would embarrass themselves by trying to argue with the inspired scripture on this.
So then we know—if Revelation is written in the 60’s then the events of 70 AD would square every bit of this. However, if Revelation were written in the 90’s there is not yet any historical event that could possible square it.
Since we know since Jesus told us in Luke 21:22 that His generation would not pass away till all things are written are fulfilled and Jerusalem’s fall is specifically part of those events mentioned then nothing else left written in prophecy can possibly left to be fulfilled after 70 AD.
Hence we are certain that Jesus returned in 70 AD and resurrection took place then. No way around it unless you want to call Jesus a liar.
Futurists can’t accept the teachings of Christ and seek to physicalize the return of Christ. Sad.
Thanks for making my point winman
A special thinks to winman tonight for helping to prove all the verses concerning the timing of Christ’s return imply soon. He no doubt spent long hours looking over the bible to find his 3 verses (all parables at that, lol) to misrepresent the timing of Christ’s return.
Mat 25:5 While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.
Mat 25:19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.
Mat 24:48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
Mat 24:48 – as it was pointed out to you it was the evil servant who made the comment. Enough said.
Mat 25:5 – tarried –really man—it doesn’t even say tarried a long time.
Mat 25:19 - It is a parable about the kingdom of heaven told through talents it is not a parable about the timing of Christ’s return. If you couldn’t figure that out I hope I have helped straighten it out for you.
If there were any verses in the bible about Christ’s return not being soon I’m sure Winman would have found them and posted them—given that he couldn’t and choose to try a ruse—he has confirmed that all timing statements in the bible guarantee a soon return of Christ.
Thank you so much winman.
A special thinks to winman tonight for helping to prove all the verses concerning the timing of Christ’s return imply soon. He no doubt spent long hours looking over the bible to find his 3 verses (all parables at that, lol) to misrepresent the timing of Christ’s return.
Mat 25:5 While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.
Mat 25:19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.
Mat 24:48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
Mat 24:48 – as it was pointed out to you it was the evil servant who made the comment. Enough said.
Mat 25:5 – tarried –really man—it doesn’t even say tarried a long time.
Mat 25:19 - It is a parable about the kingdom of heaven told through talents it is not a parable about the timing of Christ’s return. If you couldn’t figure that out I hope I have helped straighten it out for you.
If there were any verses in the bible about Christ’s return not being soon I’m sure Winman would have found them and posted them—given that he couldn’t and choose to try a ruse—he has confirmed that all timing statements in the bible guarantee a soon return of Christ.
Thank you so much winman.
The more they protest the more I feel confident I'm winning the argument
JOJ I’m so happy to see a few of the kin folk coming to your aid—I do hope a few more will see fit to join the good fight. Sic’em boys! Let’s go get that big meanie. I’m with you all the way. What a big bully he is beating up on JOJ all the time like that. Why he even used bible verses to make JOJ feel bad and slander the good name of futurism. Meanie! It’s just not fair. I’m gonna rebuke that heathen!
JOJ I’m so happy to see a few of the kin folk coming to your aid—I do hope a few more will see fit to join the good fight. Sic’em boys! Let’s go get that big meanie. I’m with you all the way. What a big bully he is beating up on JOJ all the time like that. Why he even used bible verses to make JOJ feel bad and slander the good name of futurism. Meanie! It’s just not fair. I’m gonna rebuke that heathen!
Sorry about that. I did see that later and realized I had missed it.
I'm not sure what the problem is there. I've never had a problem with Daniel having some things "shut up" and Revelation not. I assume you are talking about 8:26--"Wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days." In the first place "many days" could easily refer to the explanations in Revelation of the same topic, since it was certainly "many days"--hundreds of years at that--between the two books. In the second place, Daniel was referring to a particular vision, not the whole book of Revelation. So I fail to see any problem here.
If you mean 12:4 & 9, again I don't have a problem. It is provable that we are now in the "end times" and Daniel was told to seal the book "to the time of the end." So I fail to see any problem.
OR is like my fan club president
OR I sort of think of you as one of my groupies. You don’t post any scripture to defend futurism which is tantamount to tacit agreement that preterism constitutes the correct view on prophecy.
I think insults are just your way of showing support.
I’m sure if you could make a scriptural defense of futurism you would do so since you do post scripture in other places--just not in this thread (well you did finally do one here—it’s a start, but so far not a trend). Your lack of scripture here speaks volumes.
Thanks for your support and helping to prove my point my good man.
We are an awesome team!
OR I sort of think of you as one of my groupies. You don’t post any scripture to defend futurism which is tantamount to tacit agreement that preterism constitutes the correct view on prophecy.
I think insults are just your way of showing support.
I’m sure if you could make a scriptural defense of futurism you would do so since you do post scripture in other places--just not in this thread (well you did finally do one here—it’s a start, but so far not a trend). Your lack of scripture here speaks volumes.
Thanks for your support and helping to prove my point my good man.
We are an awesome team!
The more they cry foul the more you know they don’t have scripture on their side.
HeirofSalvation,
Boo hoo, poor JOJ’s honor has been smitten in the flower of its youth. Please join me in a moment of silence to mourn JOJ’s honor.
Then I shall mount my trusty steed and lead a mob carrying pitch forks and torches to track down that dastardly, honor-slaying, ogre of a monster and burn him at the stake.
Are you with me bro?
HeirofSalvation,
Boo hoo, poor JOJ’s honor has been smitten in the flower of its youth. Please join me in a moment of silence to mourn JOJ’s honor.
Then I shall mount my trusty steed and lead a mob carrying pitch forks and torches to track down that dastardly, honor-slaying, ogre of a monster and burn him at the stake.
Are you with me bro?