[MOVED] End of the world predictions are a dime a dozen and always wrong. :)

[parousia70]

First, that's not my argument! I didn't argue against the destination being the same, but the timing.

Well the text In question teaches that the destination is the same, while it explicitly teaches that the timing is not.

There's no rational reason to attribute any vast length of time to the word 'then'. It can simply mean 'next'.

I have provided multiple examples where epeita does not mean, indeed cannot mean "next".

Where (Chapter and Verse) can I find its scriptural usage to mean "the very next immediate event", besides this one we are disputing?

 

[eclipsenow]

You still haven't told me why the dead rising first matters?

To use your examples. It mattered that Noah went into the ark first, before the flood came. It also mattered that lot left Sodom first, before the fire came.

So Why do you say it matters that the dead rise first before the living are changed?

I don't, Jesus does through Paul, and I'm not sure why. It could just be that God is going to demonstrate that the day is HERE by raising everyone then changing us. Paul's emphasis was on comforting grieving Christians, so it may even be a matter of emphasis. I kind of instinctively imagine it all happening at once.

 

[eclipsenow]

Parousia said: "I have provided multiple examples where epeita does not mean, indeed cannot mean "next"."

James 3:17 shows how it can also be used as a list, as things that are simply in an order of events or subjects, with no time even being in mind! It's just "the thing that is next in my list".

17 But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere.

 

[parousia70]

I don't, Jesus does through Paul, and I'm not sure why.

Fair enough.

It could just be that God is going to demonstrate that the day is HERE by raising everyone then changing us.

If "could be's" are enough of a sturdy foundation for you to build your doctrine upon, more power to ya I guess.

Paul's emphasis was on comforting grieving Christians,

Would you find it truly comforting if you were grieving and I told you, "hey, don't worry, in a couple thousand years something amazing is going to happen for some other generation of people to witness"?

I kind of instinctively imagine it all happening at once.

Yet Paul EXPLICITLY Teaches it does NOT happen at once.

Given the choice between which opposing view to believe, your instinct and imagination, or Paul's direct teaching, my money's on Paul.

 

[parousia70]

Parousia said: "I have provided multiple examples where epeita does not mean, indeed cannot mean "next"."

James 3:17 shows how it can also be used as a list, as things that are simply in an order of events or subjects, with no time even being in mind! It's just "the thing that is next in my list".

17 But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere.

You are correct in that there is no time in mind here...in this context, epeita is used qualitatively, not quantitatively., so it cannot mean "next event in succession" as you are hoping to show.

But ok, I'll give ya ONE anyway, cause my momma raised me right.
Anywhere else?

 

[eclipsenow]

Yet Paul EXPLICITLY Teaches it does NOT happen at once.

No he doesn't, or I would accept it.

You're building an awful lot on your particular use of the word 'then', when there's no evidence in the passage that there is any significant amount of time between the dead rising and us changing.

If you're saying that you don't believe any of these verses are about the Last Day, then what 'change' is going to happen to the living?

Given the choice between which opposing view to believe, your instinct and imagination, or Paul's direct teaching, my money's on Paul.

Not so fast sunshine. I was stating my instinct about something I don't believe the bible spells out exactly. You've haven't proved anything about this verse, just made a bunch of assertions and ignored contrary evidence.

Parousia wrote:

You are correct in that there is no time in mind here...in this context, epeita is used qualitatively, not quantitatively., so it cannot mean "next event in succession" as you are hoping to show.​

Oh, right, qualitative not quantitatively? Riiiight. What does that even mean? You just make words say whatever you want them to! Here's the same greek word and it DOES NOT mean a significant amount of time. It's not even 'later'. It's just then. The thing that's next. So if the same greek word can be used in this context....

James 3: 17 But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere.​

(NIV renders it "after that" below, as in then, next).

16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.​

But you mentioned qualitatively. What quality will that resurrection have? Will it just be ghostly or spiritual? A resurrection that the dead experience from the moment of death? Well, I know some Protestants that believe that believers go to be with God without their bodies, and start to enjoy eternity with Him immediately. Others believe that, subjectively, we go straight to the Last Day. It's called 'soul sleep', and that the essential you is basically held safe by God in 'sleep' and woken up on the Last Day. There are hints of this in the passage below.

1 Thess 4
13 Brothers and sisters, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you do not grieve like the rest of mankind, who have no hope.

But here's the kicker. What's the quality of the resurrection going to be like? Spiritual, or physical?

14 For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him.

Get that? It's not some ghostly resurrection, it's physical just as Jesus resurrection was physical. I don't know about you, but I'm not seeing believers who have died jumping up out of their grave!

 

[Ronald]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...moon-and-meteor-strike-prophecy-10491339.html

I guess I'm actually rather amazed at how many people seem to have an undo fascination with the "end of times". Every generation thinks that they live in the end times, and they're sure that all the signs clearly demonstrate that they are living in the end times, but the world just keeps right on plugging and chugging. The Bible tells us that nobody can actually predict the time or date in the first place, so what exactly *is* the big psychological fascination with various 'end of the world' claims and false prophesies anyway? Why isn't it always seen as another 'cry wolf' claim?

I kinda hoped that after all the "end of the Mayan calendar" hype was done and behind us, and the dust of disappointment had finally settled over the new age masses, that things would slow down for awhile. Quite the opposite seems to be occurring. It seems like every other month another end of the world "prediction" comes along, just as a previous one bites the dust like all the rest. It's like a revolving door of never ending "end of the world" fixations.

Where the first 3 1/2 years (1260 days) is not extreme tribulation for America, it certainly has been for Christians in those Muslim countries where they are getting their heads chopped off and hence fleeing to other countries -- millions of them. The movement of ISIS started within last few years and so continues to spread. When exactly ISIS began, I don't know but it could have been on Dec. 21, 2012?

 

[eclipsenow]

Are we up to a dozen yet?. Well, here's another. Since you mentioned the Mayan Calendar, there is another explanation stating that it wasn't the end of the world, just the beginning of the end. Where the first 3 1/2 years (1260 days) is not extreme tribulation for America, it certainly has been for Christians in those Muslim countries where they are getting their heads chopped off and hence fleeing to other countries -- millions of them.
So let's say Dec. 21, 2012 started the clock. What happened on that day? Well, millions of people around the world got together and prayed for peace anticipating something terrible was going to happen. Not only at the Mayan cites. I would say that is a powerful peace treaty. Well 3 1/2 years later, let's say it's broken on June 3, 2016, which happens to be an interesting day, a triple alignment of planets, that happens to be very rare. Then three days later something else happens (I won't inform you because I want it to be a surprise) and we are ushered into the darkest time in history, the Great Tribulation period that lasts 3 1/2 years. If that happens, then I guess you got your dimes worth. If it doesn't, it doesn't mean that we are headed towards a cliff, WWIII, financial collapse, ISIS infiltration, etc.

Again, a dime a dozen. The 3.5 years is symbolic of a limited period in history. That's all. It's half of 7, the perfect number. It just means God will limit these terrible times in which Crusades and Hitler's and North Korea's clutter our landscape. The "Last Days" have been running for 2000 years (Acts 2, Hebrews 1) and who knows whether they'll go for another 5 seconds or 50,000 years? We just don't know.

 

[Ronald]

Again, a dime a dozen. The 3.5 years is symbolic of a limited period in history. That's all. It's half of 7, the perfect number. It just means God will limit these terrible times in which Crusades and Hitler's and North Korea's clutter our landscape. The "Last Days" have been running for 2000 years (Acts 2, Hebrews 1) and who knows whether they'll go for another 5 seconds or 50,000 years? We just don't know.

Again, a dime a dozen. The 3.5 years is symbolic of a limited period in history. That's all. It's half of 7, the perfect number. It just means God will limit these terrible times in which Crusades and Hitler's and North Korea's clutter our landscape. The "Last Days" have been running for 2000 years (Acts 2, Hebrews 1) and who knows whether they'll go for another 5 seconds or 50,000 years? We just don't know.

Well, Jesus gave us signs to look for, events and numerous other prophecies that identify this generation (the one when Israel becomes a nation after being scattered for over 18 centuries). He also tells us more specifically when the end will come: "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come."Matt. 24:14 I think we've about reached that point. Name a nation or tribe we haven't witnessed to?
1260 days = 3 1/2 years that's an accurate measure of time, not symbolism!
50,000 years? You really think we could even last another 30 years the way things are going? Europe's culture will be dominated by Islam and bowing down to Allah by then. There's a 15 minute video that forecasts the demographics of the spread of Islam and effects on cultures. We need 2 children per family to sustain a culture. Long story short, Europe is maybe knocking of 1.3 - 1.5. We are producing 1.7. Muslims have 4-6 children per family. China has been under 1 per family and so do the math. They will conquer eventually just by numbers alone. But really, if the ISIS caliphate is not quickly defeated, the rest of Islam will support them and that's it. Even now it is said that 15% of Sunni Muslims worldwide are in support of them - that's over 150 million - HELLO ... wake up ... Judgment Day is imminent!

 

[Postvieww]

Ok, But I'm not going to let it slide..I'll just assume you do hold the possibility that God is capable of what I suggested.
We are making progress indeed!



With Pleasure:
I am a partial preterist, so is eclipse, and, brace yourself, so are you. We only vary by degree.

The accusation of full preterism is a heavy one here on CF, and the burden is on the accuser to prove it.
Show me any view I have espoused that is exclusive to full preterism, and I'll recant it here and now.



You are certainly entitled to that opinion, but I, many scholars, and even ECF's disagree.



There is no authoritative scriptural cross reference to each individual passage of the Nicene creed that I am aware of.
As a Catholic I Hold the Creed as equally authoritative to scripture, all on it own.



So you believe in ONE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH?
There is hope for you!



Well I'm guessing you also have a different view of "One Holy CATHOLIC Church" than I do as well.
So your objection to how I understand the Nicene Creed isn't really limited to eschatology is it?
Perhaps you'd like to show us the scriptural cross reference you believe is "on par" with the Creedal statement "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church"? I'm curious where one would find that teaching in scripture.



I have no lack of that belief. I believe in a Bodily resurrection, and have never once indicated otherwise. It seems It's the nature of the Resurrected Body that you and disagree upon.


Yup. It's why I'm not a full preterist.




Well, I realize that is what you believe, and that's what we are debating. You have by no means established that as fact however.



I assume you mean 2 Peter 3:10?

Ahh the elements melting,earth burning,thief in the night...yes indeed.

I just compare scripture with scripture to come up with the Biblical understanding. If I want to know what a particular word or phrase means or how it is being used, I look elsewhere in scripture to find what it means and how it is used there, in as many other places I can find it.

Isn't that what you do?
Isn't that what we're supposed to do?

1) Jesus Himself applies His thief's coming to first century peoples (Rev 3:3) If 1948, microchips, OWG etc are doctrines prophesied in scripture, the Glorified Christ in Heaven shows He knows nothing about them when he promises His thiefs coming would befall 1st century Christians at Sardis.

2) Elements melting

Elements is used 7 times in the NT and in each of those 7, it is used to refer to the basic, rudimentary, fundamental principles of the Mosaic Law, not the periodic table as you seem to insist.

It is you who have failed to harmonize this scripture with the rest when you insist only 6 of the 7 refer to the Law, but THIS ONE TIME it refers to the periodic Table. You have presented no scriptural instruction that teaches you to do this.

3) Heavens passing away, earth burning up

I have addressed this language multiple times in this thread, but I'm happy to do so again.
.
Note that such apocalyptic language is used of all God's "comings" in history:

God's Coming to End Saul's Kingdom
Then the earth shook and quaked, the foundations of heaven were trembling and were shaken, because He was angry. Smoke went up out of His nostrils, fire from His mouth devoured; coals were kindled by it. He bowed the heavens also, and came down with thick darkness under His feet. And He rode on a cherub and flew; And He appeared on the wings of the wind. And He made darkness canopies around Him, a mass of waters, thick clouds of the sky. From the brightness before Him coals of fire were kindled. The LORD thundered from heaven, and the Most High uttered His voice. And He sent out arrows, and scattered them, Lightning, and routed them. Then the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were laid bare by the rebuke of the LORD, at the blast of the breath of His nostrils. (2 Sam 22:8-16)

God's Coming to Judge Nineveh
The LORD takes vengeance on His adversaries, and He reserves wrath for His enemies...In whirlwind and storm is His way, and clouds are the dust beneath His feet... Mountains quake because of Him and the hills dissolve; Indeed the earth is upheaved by His presence, the world and all the inhabitants in it. (Nahum 1:2-5)

God Comes To Judge Ancient Babylon, raises up the Medes
Wail, for the day of the LORD is near; it will come like destruction from the Almighty! Therefore all hands will be feeble, and every human heart will melt, and they will be dismayed. Pangs and agony will seize them; they will be in anguish like a woman in labor. They will look aghast at one another; their faces will be aflame. See, the day of the LORD comes, cruel, with wrath and fierce anger, to make the earth a desolation, and to destroy its sinners from it. For the stars of the heavens and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be dark at its rising, and the moon will not shed its light. I will punish the world for its evil, and the wicked for their iniquity...Therefore I will make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken out of its place, at the wrath of the LORD of hosts in the day of his fierce anger. Like a hunted gazelle, or like sheep with no one to gather them, all will turn to their own people, and all will flee to their own lands. Whoever is found will be thrust through, and whoever is caught will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be plundered, and their wives ravished. See, I am stirring up the Medes against them, who have no regard for silver and do not delight in gold. Their bows will slaughter the young men; they will have no mercy on the fruit of the womb; their eyes will not pity children. And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the splendor and pride of the Chaldeans, will be like Sodom and Gomorrah when God overthrew them. (Isaiah 13:6-11, 13,15-19)

You will Note that whenever God has come in biblical times, earth-destroying, mountain-melting, humanity-destroying doom language is applied. I could list dozens of other examples of past judgments that use that language to describe God's hand in the rise and fall of civilizations and empires.

As we see from this brief survey of the cloud comings of God in history, they all follow a similar pattern, nature, and experience: trumpets, clouds, darkening of the constellations, shaking of earth's foundations, great tribulation and distress, God's coming down with his armies. The apocalyptic language is graphic, filled with doom, and repeated at each of God's comings.

While all those comings took place in a timeframe near and at hand to those people, as prophesied, the final judgment of God in history--perhaps many thousands of years into the future--could very well have a similar pattern, though the specific details are unknown to men.(Deuteronomy 29:29)

As St. Thomas Aquinas taught:
The signs of which we read in the gospels, as Augustine says, writing to Hesychius about the end of the world, refer not only to Christ's coming to judgment, but also to the time of the sack of Jerusalem, and to the coming of Christ in ceaselessly visiting His Church. So that, perhaps, if we consider them carefully, we shall find that none of them refers to the coming advent, as he remarks: because these signs that are mentioned in the gospels, such as wars, fears, and so forth, have been from the beginning of the human race (Thomas Aquinas; Summa Theologica, Supplement Question 73, Article 1)

I hold the view Sts Augustine and Aquinas espouse above.
Are you still concerned I and they are FULL preterists?

Parousia70 post #257

Ok, But I'm not going to let it slide..I'll just assume you do hold the possibility that God is capable of what I suggested.

We are making progress indeed!

God can do anything He wants to do even let a man in Portland see the return of Christ in Jerusalem. So you agree He will in His flesh and bone, resurrected body return to earth?

Like you said progress!

With Pleasure:

I am a partial preterist, so is eclipse, and, brace yourself, so are you. We only vary by degree.

The accusation of full preterism is a heavy one here on CF, and the burden is on the accuser to prove it.

Show me any view I have espoused that is exclusive to full preterism, and I'll recant it here and now.

Ok. Fair enough. Let’agree on some definitions, then we can proceed.

What is your definition of a full preterist? Mine is the teaching that all prophecies in the NT relating to the coming of the Lord and resurrection of the saints have been fulfilled. It sure seems that’s where you come down. If not what coming of the Lord passage has not been fulfilled? In #246 you stated 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 is fulfilled and by extension I would assume you believe the same for 1 Corinthians 15. What resurrection passage has not been fulfilled?

What is your definition of resurrection as referred to in John 5:29, John 11:24, Hebrews 6:2, Philippians 3:10-21, and many others but you understand where I’m coming from. I believe it is a bodily resurrection just as Jesus.

Very interesting scripture below maybe you could comment on it.

2 Timothy 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

For the purpose of our discussion the coming of Christ is His future return bodily to this earth

Matthew 18:20

For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.”

From post #254 I believe this just as strongly as you do but this is absolutely not a coming of the Lord as referred to in many of the scriptures we have discussed. This is a maneuver to make your doctrine work where it falls apart under the scrutiny of scripture.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion, but I, many scholars, and even ECF's disagree.

Many Catholics disagree with you as well.

Comment on catechism 675 at the 14:25 mark of the video.

There is no authoritative scriptural cross reference to each individual passage of the Nicene creed that I am aware of.

As a Catholic I Hold the Creed as equally authoritative to scripture, all on it own.

Post #254 Quote from the “Nicene Creed”

“And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And we believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen."

Post #257 Quote from the “Nicene Creed”

“And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And we believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen."

So you believe in ONE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH?

Why did you post as a quote from my post #254 and underline a different statement than the one I underlined? Then imply I believe in the HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH.

There is hope for you!

Well I'm guessing you also have a different view of "One Holy CATHOLIC Church" than I do as well.

That would be a reasonable guess. I’m sure you probably do not want to get into that discussion.

So your objection to how I understand the Nicene Creed isn't really limited to eschatology is it?

No our discussion is eschatology, I posted the quote and pointed out what I believe differs from what you claim. With your very fluid definitions of doctrine such as resurrection of the dead and coming of the Lord it is very difficult to have a meaningful discussion.

Perhaps you'd like to show us the scriptural cross reference you believe is "on par" with the Creedal statement "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church"? I'm curious where one would find that teaching in scripture.

Whatever made you think I believe there is one? You raise a good point, where does one find that in scripture? While we are at it on what authority do we place the Nicene Creed on par with scripture? All the points that matter can be found in scripture. We have the scripture why do we need the creed?

I have no lack of that belief. I believe in a Bodily resurrection, and have never once indicated otherwise. It seems It's the nature of the Resurrected Body that you and disagree upon.

Post #254 I would venture to say most believers who recite this creed have a different view of the resurrection than you. I see nothing in this creed to support your lack of belief in a bodily resurrection of the righteous dead. The creed says “we look for” that is yet future.

Redefining the definitions of words seems to be our disagreement on several issues. Would you clearly and distinctly spell out what you believe a bodily resurrection is and the scripture reference you base that belief on?

Yup. It's why I'm not a full preterist.

Really then what is your definition of “resurrection of the dead”.

Post# 254 Many of the prophesies you claim are fulfilled are not.

Well, I realize that is what you believe, and that's what we are debating. You have by no means established that as fact however.

Nor have you stablished that all of these prophecies are fulfilled.

I assume you mean 2 Peter 3:10?

You are correct, typo.

Ahh the elements melting,earth burning,thief in the night...yes indeed.

I just compare scripture with scripture to come up with the Biblical understanding. If I want to know what a particular word or phrase means or how it is being used, I look elsewhere in scripture to find what it means and how it is used there, in as many other places I can find it.

Isn't that what you do?

Isn't that what we're supposed to do?

1) Jesus Himself applies His thief's coming to first century peoples (Rev 3:3)

If 1948, (Amos 9:14-15,Ezekial 37:21; Isaiah 11:11; Jeremiah 29:14).") microchips, (I haven’t promoted microchips Revelation 13:16-17). OWG ( Revlation 13:7) etc are doctrines prophesied in scripture, the Glorified Christ in Heaven shows He knows nothing about them when he promises His thiefs coming would befall 1st century Christians at Sardis.

Sardis: You keep ignoring the fact that this promise was conditional, Rev 3:3b “If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee” This is not the same as 1 Thessalonians 5:2-4, 2 Peter 3:10 or Revelation 16:15.

The coming of Revelation 2:5 to the church at Ephesus was conditional.

Smyrna: No coming mentioned .

The coming of Revelation 2:16 to the church at Pergamos was conditional

Thyatira: “Hold fast till I come” in Revelation 2:25-27 does not imply an absolute coming in their day.

Philadelphia: Revelation 3:11 “Behold, I come quickly” I'm sure you can define quickly.

Laodicea: No specific coming mentioned.

None of these churches were in or near Jerusalem in 70 AD (all were in present day Turkey) none were affected by events of 70 AD in Jerusalem.

2) Elements melting

Elements is used 7 times in the NT

I found 4 Galatians 4:3 & 9 2 Peter 3:10 & 12

and in each of those 7, it is used to refer to the basic, rudimentary, fundamental principles of the Mosaic Law, not the periodic table as you seem to insist.

The context in Galations does not refer to the “periodic table” but the context of 2 Peter does!

It is you who have failed to harmonize this scripture with the rest when you insist only 6 of the 7 refer to the Law, but THIS ONE TIME it refers to the periodic Table. You have presented no scriptural instruction that teaches you to do this.

Straw man argument.

Maybe you should do a comparison of all the times the word resurrection is used in the NT and come to some kind of reasonable consensus as to its meaning. Since we agree Jesus was resurrected in a flesh and bone body, why should the resurrection be any different for the dead in Christ?

3) Heavens passing away, earth burning up

I have addressed this language multiple times in this thread, but I'm happy to do so again.

.Note that such apocalyptic language is used of all God's "comings" in history:

2 Peter 3: It seems you spend a lot of time telling me why I can’t believe what the text of many passages actually says. Let’s look at the whole chapter. Verses 3 & 4 describe perfectly what we see today, especially verse 4. Verses 5 & 6 makes the point of how God destroyed the earth with the flood not trying to debate the extent of that destruction with you, but by all scriptural accounts it was major. Verses 7-14 tell us of a future destruction ending with the creation of a new heavens and earth. I ‘m sure you disagree, but I just believe what it says. Those in Noah’s day didn’t believe either until the flood took them all away.

As St. Thomas Aquinas taught:

The signs of which we read in the gospels, as Augustine says, writing to Hesychius about the end of the world, refer not only to Christ's coming to judgment, but also to the time of the sack of Jerusalem, and to the coming of Christ in ceaselessly visiting His Church. So that, perhaps, if we consider them carefully, we shall find that none of them refers to the coming advent ( is this saying there is a coming advent?), as he remarks: because these signs that are mentioned in the gospels, such as wars, fears, and so forth, have been from the beginning of the human race (2 Peter3:3-4)(Thomas Aquinas; Summa Theologica, Supplement Question 73, Article 1)


I hold the view Sts Augustine and Aquinas espouse above.

Are you still concerned I and they are FULL preterists?

I guess as long as you hold to an erroneous view of Matthew 18:20 and count it on par with Revelation 19:11-16 you have wiggle room in your mind, but not in mine.

If you do not believe all is fulfilled, show me the passages that are yet unfulfilled.

Was the second coming of Christ in AD 70?

Was the resurrection of the dead in AD 70?

Was the final judgement in AD 70?

 

[parousia70]

No he doesn't, or I would accept it.

For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.

Accept it.

Not so fast sunshine.

Easy their Thundercloud, I said I'd give ya that ONE. Where else can you find it? I'm pretty sure you need 2 or three before you can Build a doctrine upon it.

Well, I know some Protestants that believe that believers go to be with God without their bodies, and start to enjoy eternity with Him immediately. Others believe that, subjectively, we go straight to the Last Day. It's called 'soul sleep', and that the essential you is basically held safe by God in 'sleep' and woken up on the Last Day.

And which of those two do you believe?
Are those the only two options for the orthodox Christian?

But here's the kicker. What's the quality of the resurrection going to be like? Spiritual, or physical?

Paul answers that question quite clearly.

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. 43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

 

[parousia70]

Parousia70 post #257

God can do anything He wants to do even let a man in Portland see the return of Christ in Jerusalem. So you agree He will in His flesh and bone, resurrected body return to earth?

Well, He did say this:
“A little while longer and the world will see Me no more.." (Jn 14:19)

How long is "No more" in your view?

What is your definition of a full preterist? Mine is the teaching that all prophecies in the NT relating to the coming of the Lord and resurrection of the saints have been fulfilled. It sure seems that’s where you come down.

I believe all Biblical eschatology found it's PRIMARY fulfillment in and around the events leading up to and including Jerusalem's AD70 destruction.

I have been VERY CLEAR with you that I also believe those events likely TYPIFY the future to us Creedal consummation, and as such render me diametrically opposed to the full preterist position.

What is your definition of resurrection as referred to in John 5:29, John 11:24, Hebrews 6:2, Philippians 3:10-21, and many others but you understand where I’m coming from.

Well, Resurrection is a tricky topic because the bible uses the term "resurrection" of national restorations, personal salvation/baptism, the transfer of departed souls in the O.T. Hades into God's heaven, and the final state of all things.

I believe it is a bodily resurrection just as Jesus.

Just as?
So you believe we will retain our death wounds, if any, in our resurrected bodies "Just as" Jesus did?
Bullet holes, stab wounds, mangled limbs from an auto accident, beheadings?

Very interesting scripture below maybe you could comment on it.

2 Timothy 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

Sure,
And while I do, perhaps you could state as briefly as possible what you believe Hymenaeus was saying and why it was gravely false compared to what Paul taught?

In YOUR view, what precisely is the error of Hymenaeus that Paul is rebuking? Is it timing that Paul has problems with? If yes, why?

Is it the nature of the event Paul has problems with? If yes, how do you know this from the passage?

I say it's timing, 1) because Paul explicitly says it was about timing and 2) if it were nature, Paul could have simply taken him to the nearest cemetery and pointed to the unopened graves and, case closed. But that's not what Paul did.

I believe my question to you about this, combined with the timing error of Hymenaeus, will help us arrive at the answer. What damning, faith-destroying error did Paul continuously have to address in his epistles?
Do you know?
Hint: the answer links right up to the error of Hymenaeus.

Sardis: You keep ignoring the fact that this promise was conditional, Rev 3:3b “If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee” This is not the same as 1 Thessalonians 5:2-4, 2 Peter 3:10 or Revelation 16:15.

The Thief's coming of Jesus Christ was a conditional first-century event based on the decisions of men??? The Thief's coming of Jesus Christ was delayed 2000+ years because some first-century men did or did not not repent when Jesus attempted to come back for them? Not hardly.

Furthermore, St. John did not say Christ's coming to them was conditional. RATHER, what was conditional was whether or not Jesus was going to reward them or punish them at his coming to them. That Jesus was returning to those seven churches of Asia Minor is not in question, if we are to trust the words of St. John and Jesus Christ.

The only conditional part to Rev 2-3 is whether each Church would be punished or rewarded (according to their works, of course). If they were obedient, they were rewarded. If disobedient, punished. The idea that Christ was making his thief's coming to them conditional is nowhere in the text.

The giving of either a punishment or a reward was all that was conditional, and the condition was placed upon "their works" (Matt 16:27; Rev 20:13; Rom 2:6), which Jesus was then judging in Rev 2-3 (Rev 2:2, 2:9, 2:13, 2:19, Rev 3:2, 3:8, 3:15 ). The judging of their works took place in Revelation 2-3, back in the first century, and St. John documents it for us to read about.

And, again, if there is any "Church Age Dispensation" or "1948" or "Computerized mark" to be found in prophetic scripture, then Revelation 2-3 clearly demonstrates that Jesus knew nothing about it! There is no way around it, Postview, Since Jesus was, in your view, offering a conditional Thief's coming back in the first century, then that makes the glorified Jesus entirely ignorant of the Long Church Age Dispensation, ignorant of 1948, and ignorant of any computerized mark that is inserted into one's hand! This fact alone entirely destroys the main tenets of futurism.

The Thief's coming of Christ is NOT A CONDITIONAL EVENT. According to scripture, the coming of Christ was to take place irrespective of whether some repented and others did not -- in fact, the doctrine of the coming fully and uniformly teaches that some would be faithful and others unfaithful (Romans 2:5-9; Mt 25:1-13; Lk 13:24-30; 1 Cor 3:12-15). As the angel also plainly states:

Revelation 22:10-11
And he said to me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near. Let the one who does wrong, still do wrong; and the one who is filthy, still be filthy; and let the one who is righteous, still practice righteousness; and the one who is holy, still keep himself holy."


Did you catch that? Man's repentance or lack thereof has nothing to do with the timing of the coming of Christ. Nothing whatsoever. Note also that Jesus explicitly says that the Thyatria Prophetess movement chose not to repent, and that He was coming and would kill her and her "children." But to the rest at Thyatria (the faithful), they were to hold fast and had no additional burden placed upon them, for Jesus had rewards to give them as stated in Rev 2:26-28. We know that Christ came to them, for he came and killed the Prophetess and rewarded the faithful as he said. This is all first-century stuff here. No "Church Age," no "1948," no "OWG" no "21st century computer chips" -- the glorified Jesus knew of none of those modern speculative doctrines, and that makes them impossible doctrines, ones not found anywhere in scripture. Had any of those things been biblical doctrines, then Jesus would not be speaking to first-century churches about His thiefs coming as we see him doing in Revelation 2-3, where He plainly applies the doctrine to first-century people. Jesus must be right, and therefore futurism must be wrong concerning the timing of the thiefs coming of Christ.

--THE RELIEF PROVIDED BY CHRIST'S COMING--

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Thessalonica
promise: 2 Thess 1:6-7
result: their persecutors would be cut off, ending their persecution

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Thyatira
promise: Rev 2:18-25
result: their false prophetess and all her followers would be killed off by
Christ's coming. The Church was granted Christ's authority.

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Pergamum
promise: Rev 2:12-16
result: the heretical Nicolaitans were to put down by Christ's coming to
Pergamum. The Nicolaitans that were causing them to break the decree of the Council of Jerusalem were killed (Rev 2:14; cf.Acts 15:28-29).

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Sardis
promise: Rev 3:1-5
result: Christ promises them that his "thief-in-the-night" coming will come
upon them. They had not been faithfully expecting "the thief" as explained to them in Matt 24:43/1 Thess5:2-5. However, a few in Sardis were found worthy and had not soiled their garments. At Christ's coming to them "they walked in white, for they were worthy" (Rev 3:4-5).

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Philadelphia
promise: Rev 3:7-13
result: Christ puts down the then-contemporary Jewish persecution (3:9).
He preserves the Church at Philadelphia through the testing which was then about to come upon the whole empire (3:10). God makes his faithful ones "pillars" in the Temple of God.

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Laodicea
promise: Rev 3:14-21
result: Christ is shown to be knocking at their door as first promised in Matt 24:33 (cf. also James 5:9). If they didn't repent it appears they were annihilated. Repentant and obedient followers said to become partakers of Christ's heavenly authority.

I could add many other things, but this will do for now. It is clear that the scriptures contain the historic record of the tribulation period, and they explain the relief that Christ's Coming brought to the churches around the empire, precisely as they were promised. Christ did not fail them.

2) Elements melting

Elements is used 7 times in the NT

I found 4 Galatians 4:3 & 9 2 Peter 3:10 & 12

The context in Galations does not refer to the “periodic table” but the context of 2 Peter does!

With respect, that is circular reasoning. To simply say "It means that because it does" doesn't win me over, and won't ever.

And there are three more uses of "stoicheion" in the Bible that you missed:

Col 2:8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.

Col 2:20 Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations—

Heb 5:12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food.

It is these FIRST, BASIC, ELEMENTARY PRINCIPLES, the "stoicheion" of the Mosaic Law that Peter says would burn with fervent heat, and indeed at AD 70 they did.

So again, And I'll rephrase, of the 7 uses of Stoicheion in scripture, you say 5 do not mean periodoc table, but 2 do, and you base that on?? "Because you say so" is all I can come up with from what you have written.

Perhaps you could Show me the scriptural teaching that instructs you to apply a completely polar opposite meaning to two of the 7 uses?

Maybe you should do a comparison of all the times the word resurrection is used in the NT and come to some kind of reasonable consensus as to its meaning. Since we agree Jesus was resurrected in a flesh and bone body, why should the resurrection be any different for the dead in Christ?

Then it seems your claim is that any wounds we receive in death we will retain in our resurrected Bodies, no different from Jesus.
Once you allow for ONE difference, you argument that there can be no deviation between our resurrected bodies and Jesus' resurrected body, dissolves into the ether.

I assume you believe Jesus Today is confined to the Exact same Body that walked the earth? or Do you allow for some difference?
When do you Believe Jesus' body was Glorified? At the Resurrection? sometime later? sometime before?
What scripture supports your view?

3) Heavens passing away, earth burning up

I have addressed this language multiple times in this thread, but I'm happy to do so again.

.Note that such apocalyptic language is used of all God's "comings" in history:

Would you care to address those multiple passages I cited and and share your view of the language used?
Literal, Figurative? Fulfilled, Unfulfilled?

 

[eclipsenow]

Well, Jesus gave us signs to look for, events and numerous other prophecies that identify this generation (the one when Israel becomes a nation after being scattered for over 18 centuries). He also tells us more specifically when the end will come: "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come."Matt. 24:14 I think we've about reached that point.

Parousia already supplied this list of verses, but I rewrote it with a few additional links.
There is a claim that says Jesus can only return when “all nations” have been reached with the gospel, but the bible seems to indicate that this was pretty much achieved by the end of the New Testament era 2000 years ago!

It started with the Great Commission in Matt 28:7
“When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

This is a remarkable moment in Biblical Theology, that branch of Theology that studies how the Old and New Testaments fit together. This is the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham that his descendants would eventually bless the whole world: it’s God’s kingdom busting out of the geographical and political constraints of Israel, and going out into all languages and cultures and countries. It is marked by no less than the Holy Spirit coming on God’s disciples to help them achieve this witness.

Acts 1:8
“8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

What do we see by the end of the Acts period?

Colossians 1:5-6 In the same way, the gospel is bearing fruit and growing throughout the whole world—just as it has been doing among you since the day you heard it and truly understood God’s grace.

Colossians 1:23 This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven

Of special interest is the faith taking hold in the capital of the empire, Rome itself!

Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is being reported all over the world.

Romans 16:25-26 25 Now to him who is able to establish you in accordance with my gospel, the message I proclaim about Jesus Christ, in keeping with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past, 26 but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all the Gentiles might come to the obedience that comes from faith— 27 to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen.

The New Testament is clear. The Great Commission was about taking the gospel into the whole world, and it remains our gospel imperative to continue doing this today. But as far as Paul is concerned, the gospel had already left the ethnic constraints of Israel and expanded out into every nation. This is a Jew celebrating God’s kingdom going out into the non-Jewish world. And that is a remarkable fulfilment of Acts 1:8.

Also, your thoughts about Islam growing have been echoed in Christian despair about the Roman persecution of Christians 2000 years ago, the Crusades, the Black Death, various Middle Ages wars, the First World War, the Second World War, the Cold War and rise of Communism, individuals like Genghis Khan and Pol Pot and Hitler and Stalin and on and on it goes. End of the world predictions are a dime a dozen. But the reality is the Lord could have returned thousands of years ago, and could return in 5 seconds or 50,000 years. We just don't know!

 

[Jipsah]

Very soon you'll see.

And so will you.

 

[Endtime Survivors]

I guess I'm actually rather amazed at how many people seem to have an undo fascination with the "end of times".

The "endtime" is a synonym for (at least part of) "God's plan for the world". Why should it be strange to be fascinated with God's plan for the world?

The Bible tells us that nobody can actually predict the time or date in the first place, so what exactly *is* the big psychological fascination with various 'end of the world' claims and false prophesies anyway? Why isn't it always seen as another 'cry wolf' claim?

"Always" viewing claims about the endtime as crying world would be pretty narrow minded. I usually assess whether or not I believe the claim to match with my own understanding of what I believe will happen. If it matches then I'll explore it further. If it doesn't, then I discard it.

Even with the boy who cried wolf, the wolf eventually came.

As for why there are so many false claims; people like to be titillated. We like mystery, cracking the code, revealing information, getting excited etc. Some of us like to appear as though we know more than we do, or to appear somehow specially anointed (i.e. the prophet-of-God-proclaiming-the-end stuff). In some cases, playing on the fears of others does lead to money or greater influence.

Sifting through all the half-truths, false claims, misunderstandings, fear etc is part of learning discernment. As the saying goes, you don't stop searching for gold just because there are so many worthless rocks in the ground.

 

[eclipsenow]

The "endtime" is a synonym for (at least part of) "God's plan for the world". Why should it be strange to be fascinated with God's plan for the world?

Exactly! 2000 years and counting. (Acts 2, Hebrews 1).

"Always" viewing claims about the endtime as crying world would be pretty narrow minded.

I think the term you meant is 'Crying wolf', as in the little boy who cried wolf.
And yes, any time someone thinks they've worked out a date that's exactly what they're doing! Crying wolf!

I usually assess whether or not I believe the claim to match with my own understanding of what I believe will happen. If it matches then I'll explore it further. If it doesn't, then I discard it.

I believe the Lord will return in an instant as Judge, save his people, and Judge his enemies, upgrade creation, marry heaven and earth together all in the one glorious instant! I also believe there was nothing preventing the Lord from doing this once the gospel had reached the ends of the earth in the disciples generation, and that he could return in 5 seconds or 50,000 years!

With me so far?

Even with the boy who cried wolf, the wolf eventually came.

Exactly my point! So why tarnish the truth like the boy who cried wolf and lied about the wolf so much no one believed him until it was too late?

As for why there are so many false claims; people like to be titillated.

Absolutely! And it turns Revelation into a book that's all about my generation, my special understanding of today's news headlines, me and my opinions. Actually it's about the gospel, and John applying the gospel to Roman Christians about to undergo terrible persecution, and a few images of the Lord's return to remind them of the gospel promise that one day, all persecution will end.

But there ain't a code to crack as far as any timetable goes, because there's no last days timetable there! It's all gospel, through and through.

As the saying goes, you don't stop searching for gold just because there are so many worthless rocks in the ground.

But you can change mountains and search in a more profitable vein if you discover you were lied to about there being gold in that particular spot! EG: If it's not even a timetable, but a sermon to suffering Christians of John's generation, then why try and read a timetable in it?

 

[Endtime Survivors]

But you can change mountains and search in a more profitable vein if you discover you were lied to about there being gold in that particular spot! EG: If it's not even a timetable, but a sermon to suffering Christians of John's generation, then why try and read a timetable in it?

There is a timetable, and a detailed one a that; we just don't know when it will start because it hasn't been triggered. From what I understand, there will be a final 7 year period, 3.5 years of "plastic peace" and 3.5 years of "great tribulation". The start of this final 7 years will be marked by an agreement to rebuild the temple (the prophecy from Daniel 9) though I believe this prophecy has two interpretations; one being the rebuilding of the physical temple in Jerusalem (an agreement between the Jews and the AC) and an agreement between Jesus and his followers to be organized into God's spiritual temple (i.e. the 144k).

While it's true that Jesus said no one knows the hour or day, he did say that we should continually watch and he didn't say that we'd never know. Paul admonished Christians to faithfully watch so that day will not take us by surprised.

Absolutely! And it turns Revelation into a book that's all about my generation, my special understanding of today's news headlines, me and my opinions. Actually it's about the gospel

I agree, but since we know the wolf will eventually come, I think it's a matter of sincerity. One day the cry will be true and considering the Revelation is not just a series of random, isolated events and that we're told to watch (for a reason) it's likely that we'll have a fair bit of warning before the literal end. For example, the striking correlation between the Mark of the Beast and microchip implants in the hand for buying/selling. There's no apparent date for when this is meant to happen, but we don't need a specific date to see that it's taking shape in practical reality around us.

 

[eclipsenow]

There is a timetable...

Revelation 1 shows us that this book was written by John to HIS generation with a *generic* message about suffering that would apply to all generations.

1. THE LANGUAGE IS ‘SOON’ AND ‘NEAR’ NOT 2000 YEARS AWAY!

Rev 1:1 “…SOON take place."

1:3 "Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, BECAUSE THE TIME IS NEAR!"

Note that John wanted his generation to *obey* the message! How do you obey a message all about people 2000 years in the future, and not even about you? You don’t. You can’t. But John expected them to *obey* this message. Futurists just wipe this under the carpet, but it’s all here in Chapter 1: the guide for how to read this entire book! Then when John also says that he shares their tribulation, it's clear. He's writing about things that have happened, are happening, and are just about to happen. There's simply no way to insert 2000 years. None. Zero. Futurists are adding to Revelation!

 

[Postvieww]

Well, He did say this:
“A little while longer and the world will see Me no more.." (Jn 14:19)

How long is "No more" in your view?



I believe all Biblical eschatology found it's PRIMARY fulfillment in and around the events leading up to and including Jerusalem's AD70 destruction.

I have been VERY CLEAR with you that I also believe those events likely TYPIFY the future to us Creedal consummation, and as such render me diametrically opposed to the full preterist position.



Well, Resurrection is a tricky topic because the bible uses the term "resurrection" of national restorations, personal salvation/baptism, the transfer of departed souls in the O.T. Hades into God's heaven, and the final state of all things.



Just as?
So you believe we will retain our death wounds, if any, in our resurrected bodies "Just as" Jesus did?
Bullet holes, stab wounds, mangled limbs from an auto accident, beheadings?



Sure,
And while I do, perhaps you could state as briefly as possible what you believe Hymenaeus was saying and why it was gravely false compared to what Paul taught?

In YOUR view, what precisely is the error of Hymenaeus that Paul is rebuking? Is it timing that Paul has problems with? If yes, why?

Is it the nature of the event Paul has problems with? If yes, how do you know this from the passage?

I say it's timing, 1) because Paul explicitly says it was about timing and 2) if it were nature, Paul could have simply taken him to the nearest cemetery and pointed to the unopened graves and, case closed. But that's not what Paul did.

I believe my question to you about this, combined with the timing error of Hymenaeus, will help us arrive at the answer. What damning, faith-destroying error did Paul continuously have to address in his epistles?
Do you know?
Hint: the answer links right up to the error of Hymenaeus.



The Thief's coming of Jesus Christ was a conditional first-century event based on the decisions of men??? The Thief's coming of Jesus Christ was delayed 2000+ years because some first-century men did or did not not repent when Jesus attempted to come back for them? Not hardly.

Furthermore, St. John did not say Christ's coming to them was conditional. RATHER, what was conditional was whether or not Jesus was going to reward them or punish them at his coming to them. That Jesus was returning to those seven churches of Asia Minor is not in question, if we are to trust the words of St. John and Jesus Christ.

The only conditional part to Rev 2-3 is whether each Church would be punished or rewarded (according to their works, of course). If they were obedient, they were rewarded. If disobedient, punished. The idea that Christ was making his thief's coming to them conditional is nowhere in the text.

The giving of either a punishment or a reward was all that was conditional, and the condition was placed upon "their works" (Matt 16:27; Rev 20:13; Rom 2:6), which Jesus was then judging in Rev 2-3 (Rev 2:2, 2:9, 2:13, 2:19, Rev 3:2, 3:8, 3:15 ). The judging of their works took place in Revelation 2-3, back in the first century, and St. John documents it for us to read about.

And, again, if there is any "Church Age Dispensation" or "1948" or "Computerized mark" to be found in prophetic scripture, then Revelation 2-3 clearly demonstrates that Jesus knew nothing about it! There is no way around it, Postview, Since Jesus was, in your view, offering a conditional Thief's coming back in the first century, then that makes the glorified Jesus entirely ignorant of the Long Church Age Dispensation, ignorant of 1948, and ignorant of any computerized mark that is inserted into one's hand! This fact alone entirely destroys the main tenets of futurism.

The Thief's coming of Christ is NOT A CONDITIONAL EVENT. According to scripture, the coming of Christ was to take place irrespective of whether some repented and others did not -- in fact, the doctrine of the coming fully and uniformly teaches that some would be faithful and others unfaithful (Romans 2:5-9; Mt 25:1-13; Lk 13:24-30; 1 Cor 3:12-15). As the angel also plainly states:

Revelation 22:10-11
And he said to me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near. Let the one who does wrong, still do wrong; and the one who is filthy, still be filthy; and let the one who is righteous, still practice righteousness; and the one who is holy, still keep himself holy."


Did you catch that? Man's repentance or lack thereof has nothing to do with the timing of the coming of Christ. Nothing whatsoever. Note also that Jesus explicitly says that the Thyatria Prophetess movement chose not to repent, and that He was coming and would kill her and her "children." But to the rest at Thyatria (the faithful), they were to hold fast and had no additional burden placed upon them, for Jesus had rewards to give them as stated in Rev 2:26-28. We know that Christ came to them, for he came and killed the Prophetess and rewarded the faithful as he said. This is all first-century stuff here. No "Church Age," no "1948," no "OWG" no "21st century computer chips" -- the glorified Jesus knew of none of those modern speculative doctrines, and that makes them impossible doctrines, ones not found anywhere in scripture. Had any of those things been biblical doctrines, then Jesus would not be speaking to first-century churches about His thiefs coming as we see him doing in Revelation 2-3, where He plainly applies the doctrine to first-century people. Jesus must be right, and therefore futurism must be wrong concerning the timing of the thiefs coming of Christ.

--THE RELIEF PROVIDED BY CHRIST'S COMING--

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Thessalonica
promise: 2 Thess 1:6-7
result: their persecutors would be cut off, ending their persecution

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Thyatira
promise: Rev 2:18-25
result: their false prophetess and all her followers would be killed off by
Christ's coming. The Church was granted Christ's authority.

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Pergamum
promise: Rev 2:12-16
result: the heretical Nicolaitans were to put down by Christ's coming to
Pergamum. The Nicolaitans that were causing them to break the decree of the Council of Jerusalem were killed (Rev 2:14; cf.Acts 15:28-29).

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Sardis
promise: Rev 3:1-5
result: Christ promises them that his "thief-in-the-night" coming will come
upon them. They had not been faithfully expecting "the thief" as explained to them in Matt 24:43/1 Thess5:2-5. However, a few in Sardis were found worthy and had not soiled their garments. At Christ's coming to them "they walked in white, for they were worthy" (Rev 3:4-5).

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Philadelphia
promise: Rev 3:7-13
result: Christ puts down the then-contemporary Jewish persecution (3:9).
He preserves the Church at Philadelphia through the testing which was then about to come upon the whole empire (3:10). God makes his faithful ones "pillars" in the Temple of God.

* Christ's Coming to First-Century Laodicea
promise: Rev 3:14-21
result: Christ is shown to be knocking at their door as first promised in Matt 24:33 (cf. also James 5:9). If they didn't repent it appears they were annihilated. Repentant and obedient followers said to become partakers of Christ's heavenly authority.

I could add many other things, but this will do for now. It is clear that the scriptures contain the historic record of the tribulation period, and they explain the relief that Christ's Coming brought to the churches around the empire, precisely as they were promised. Christ did not fail them.



With respect, that is circular reasoning. To simply say "It means that because it does" doesn't win me over, and won't ever.

And there are three more uses of "stoicheion" in the Bible that you missed:

Col 2:8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.

Col 2:20 Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations—

Heb 5:12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food.

It is these FIRST, BASIC, ELEMENTARY PRINCIPLES, the "stoicheion" of the Mosaic Law that Peter says would burn with fervent heat, and indeed at AD 70 they did.

So again, And I'll rephrase, of the 7 uses of Stoicheion in scripture, you say 5 do not mean periodoc table, but 2 do, and you base that on?? "Because you say so" is all I can come up with from what you have written.

Perhaps you could Show me the scriptural teaching that instructs you to apply a completely polar opposite meaning to two of the 7 uses?



Then it seems your claim is that any wounds we receive in death we will retain in our resurrected Bodies, no different from Jesus.
Once you allow for ONE difference, you argument that there can be no deviation between our resurrected bodies and Jesus' resurrected body, dissolves into the ether.

I assume you believe Jesus Today is confined to the Exact same Body that walked the earth? or Do you allow for some difference?
When do you Believe Jesus' body was Glorified? At the Resurrection? sometime later? sometime before?
What scripture supports your view?



Would you care to address those multiple passages I cited and and share your view of the language used?
Literal, Figurative? Fulfilled, Unfulfilled?

Well, He did say this:

“A little while longer and the world will see Me no more.." (Jn 14:19)

How long is "No more" in your view?

Context, context context!

I believe all Biblical eschatology found it's PRIMARY fulfillment in and around the events leading up to and including Jerusalem's AD70 destruction.

I disagree and do not believe you have or can prove that many of the things you say happened actually happened. Specifically “coming of the Lord” as in Rev 19 or 1 Thess 4 and a bodily resurrection of believers as described in 1 Corin 15, Philippians 3:21, and others.

I have been VERY CLEAR with you that I also believe those events likely TYPIFY the future to us Creedal consummation, and as such render me diametrically opposed to the full preterist position.

Is this what you call wiggle room? Maybe you should spent a little more time explaining this part, rather than spending most of your time telling me why I can’t believe what scripture actually says.

Well, Resurrection is a tricky topic because the bible uses the term "resurrection" of national restorations, personal salvation/baptism, the transfer of departed souls in the O.T. Hades into God's heaven, and the final state of all things.

Yes I believe you have said it was tricky before. You do like to play with words. I defined in what context I was talking about.

Post #270 I believe it is a bodily resurrection just as Jesus.

Just as?

So you believe we will retain our death wounds, if any, in our resurrected bodies "Just as" Jesus did?

Bullet holes, stab wounds, mangled limbs from an auto accident, beheadings?

You know it is possible Jesus had black hair and brown eyes do you think I mean every resurrected person would have matching hair and eyes? Absurd, another diversionary tactic. Resurrected “as Jesus” in a real flesh and bone, immortal body. None of us have or will die for the sins of the world I’m sure there will be no nail scars.

Now here is the question from post #270, can you just answer it without literary gymnastics?

Post # 270 What is your definition of resurrection as referred to in John 5:29, John 11:24, Hebrews 6:2, Philippians 3:10-21


And while I do, perhaps you could state as briefly as possible what you believe Hymenaeus was saying and why it was gravely false compared to what Paul taught?

2 Tim 2:14 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.

15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;

18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

In YOUR view, what precisely is the error of Hymenaeus that Paul is rebuking? Is it timing that Paul has problems with? If yes, why?

Yes timing, they said the resurrection was past. Paul had a problem because it had not passed.

Is it the nature of the event Paul has problems with? If yes, how do you know this from the passage?

I say it's timing, 1) because Paul explicitly says it was about timing and 2) if it were nature, Paul could have simply taken him to the nearest cemetery and pointed to the unopened graves and, case closed. But that's not what Paul did.

Can you point to cemetery in Jerusalem or anywhere else that was opened in 70 AD? Can you provide any historical record of a bodily resurrection in 70 AD ?

I believe my question to you about this, combined with the timing error of Hymenaeus, will help us arrive at the answer. What damning, faith-destroying error did Paul continuously have to address in his epistles?

Do you know?

Hint: the answer links right up to the error of Hymenaeus.

1 Corin 15 some said there was no resurrection.

2 Tim. 2 some said it was past

2 Thess 2 some thought the day of Christ was at hand but Paul shot that down.

I don’t know what you are looking for just say it. Must you always be so cryptic?

And, again, if there is any "Church Age Dispensation" or "1948" or "Computerized mark" to be found in prophetic scripture, then Revelation 2-3 clearly demonstrates that Jesus knew nothing about it! There is no way around it, Postview, Since Jesus was, in your view, offering a conditional Thief's coming back in the first century, then that makes the glorified Jesus entirely ignorant of the Long Church Age Dispensation, ignorant of 1948, and ignorant of any computerized mark that is inserted into one's hand! This fact alone entirely destroys the main tenets of futurism.

Acts 7:55 Stephen saw Jesus Acts 9 Jesus appeared at least audibly to Saul. As I have said over and over Jesus can appear anytime to anyone He chooses, that is no coming of the Lord as prophesied in 1 Thess 4:16 2 Thess 2:1, Rev 19:11-14 and many others. It is my position the letters to the churches were written to 7 literal churches of that day and the problems addressed were specific to those churches and when Jesus said in Rev 2: 5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent. I believe in no wayrefers to a prophesied coming as listed in the passages above but is absolutely conditional and would be like the appearance to Saul.

The Thief's coming of Christ is NOT A CONDITIONAL EVENT.

Rev 2: 16 Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly

Rev 3:3b If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.

This is what the text says, I’ll stick with that.

It is these FIRST, BASIC, ELEMENTARY PRINCIPLES, the "stoicheion" of the Mosaic Law that Peter says would burn with fervent heat, and indeed at AD 70 they did.

On what authority do you remove heavens and earth from this passage only to focus on "stoicheion"?

So again, And I'll rephrase, of the 7 uses of Stoicheion in scripture, you say 5 do not mean periodoc table, but 2 do, and you base that on?? "Because you say so" is all I can come up with from what you have written.

Ok, I won’t quibble with you on the definition of "stoicheion", but we still have the heavens and earth listed separately , do we remove those just because you say so?

2 Peter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Heavens and earth mentioned. Literal or symbolic? I believe literal.

6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

The physical world perished in the flood, literally.

7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Literal heavens and earth reserved unto “fire” against the day of judgement.

8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Soon to the Lord is obviously different that you define soon.

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Maybe this accounts for the 2000 years that so concerns you.

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

The literal heavens will pass away. The literal earth and works that are therein will be literally burned up along with those elements, principle or rudiments or whatever definition you place on "stoicheion".

11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

All of those things will literally be burned up. Neither the heavens nor the earth were burned up in 70 AD.

12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

The literal heavens will be dissolved with fire and the "stoicheion" will melt with fervent heat.

13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Since all of those things will literally be destroyed God will create “a new heavens and earth” none of which happened in 70 AD. Revelation 21:1

Heb 5:12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food.

Based on the context I really doubt Paul is saying “you need someone to teach you again” the mosaic law.

Perhaps you could Show me the scriptural teaching that instructs you to apply a completely polar opposite meaning to two of the 7 uses?

3 if we remove Hebrews from your list. What allows you to ignore the fact the passage says the heavens and earth will be destroyed no matter how you define elements?

Then it seems your claim is that any wounds we receive in death we will retain in our resurrected Bodies, no different from Jesus.

Once you allow for ONE difference, you argument that there can be no deviation between our resurrected bodies and Jesus' resurrected body, dissolves into the ether.

I assume you believe Jesus Today is confined to the Exact same Body that walked the earth? or Do you allow for some difference?

When do you Believe Jesus' body was Glorified? At the Resurrection? sometime later? sometime before?

What scripture supports your view?

Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.

41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?

42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.

43 And he took it, and did eat before them.

Philippians 3:21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

 

[Endtime Survivors]

Futurists just wipe this under the carpet,

It's all interpretation. What else did you think about my post? I shared quite a bit and put a fair bit of thought into it so I'm keen to hear more than just, "I interpret 'short' differently to you therefore there is zero chance your interpretation could have any merit".