Rapture?

[Oldmantook]

@Oldmantook here is one example of biblical prophecy. If a person believes that this has been fulfilled....then just by that belief....they would qualify as a "partial preterist" (one who believes that some biblical prophecies are already in the past)

From Bible study tools:

In 538 B.C. Daniel wrote the following bold prediction:

>Daniel 9:25 - "So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks of years and sixty-two weeks of years"

In this prophecy, Daniel is claiming that there will be 69 weeks of years between the issuing of a decree to rebuild Jerusalem and the appearance of the Messiah. Now keep in mind that this bold prediction came 538 years before Christ was born.

Now let's investigate a little history, OK? In 464 BC, Artaxerxes, a Persian king, ascended to the throne. His twentieth year as king would be 464 BC. Nehemiah, the Jewish cupbearer to King Artaxerxes, was deeply concerned with the reports about the ruined condition of Jerusalem which came about as the result of their being defeated (Nehemiah 1:1-4) and as a result, he petitioned the king:

>Nehemiah 2:5,6 - "Send me to Judah, to the city of my fathers' tombs, that I may rebuild it. So it pleased the king to send me".

Scripture then provides us with the exact date of this decree to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem. According to the scriptures the decree is issued "in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king" (Nehemiah 2:1). The Jewish calendar month was Nisan, and since no day is given, it is reasonable to assume that the date would be understood as the first, the Jewish New Year's Day. And, in the Julian calendar we presently use, the corresponding date would be March 5, 444 B.C. This was the day on which the decree was issued to restore and rebuild Jerusalem.

Now let's remember this date, March 5, 444BC and take a look at the appearance of the Messiah. You may recall that the Gospels tell us that Jesus, on numerous occasions, had forbidden his followers to make him known as "the Messiah". He would frequently do miracles and tell the disciples not to tell anyone who had done the miracles because his "hour has not yet come" (John 2:4, 7:6). However, on March 30, 33 A.D., when he entered Jerusalem on a donkey, he rebuked the Pharisees' protest and encouraged the whole multitude of his disciples as they shouted, "Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord". And Jesus said, "If these become silent, the stones will cry out" (Luke 19:38-40). This was the day on which Jesus was publicly declared the Messiah.

Now let's compare the date of the decree (March 5, 444 BC) with the date of Jesus' declaration (March 30, 33 AD). Now before we begin, we need to clarify the fact that the Jewish prophetic year was composed of twelve 30 day months. In other words, the ancient evidence indicates that the Jewish prophetic year had 360 days, not 365 days. Since Daniel states 69 weeks of seven years each, and each year has 360 days, the equation is as follows: 69 x 7 x 360 = 173,880 days. In nothing more than a simple mathematical demonstration, the number of days in the period from March 5, 444 B.C. (the twentieth year of Artaxerxes) to March 30, 33 A.D. (the day Jesus entered Jerusalem on the donkey) can be determined at this point.

The time span from 444 B.C. to 33 A.D. is 476 years (remember that 1 B.C. to 1 A.D. is only one year). And if we multiply 476 years x 365.2421879 days per year (corrected for leap years), we get the result of 173,855 days. Now let's add back the difference between March 5 and March 30 (25 days). What is our total? You guessed it, 173,880 days, exactly as Daniel predicted it. ~ https://www.biblestudytools.com/bib...-filled-with-fulfilled-prophecy-11652232.html​

So is it logical to conclude that just because SOME Messianic prophecies have been fulfilled, then ALL Messianic prophecies have been fulfilled? In my opinion, that qualifies as logical fallacy otherwise known as an overgeneralization. Just because Jesus entered Jerusalem riding on a donkey does not negate other scripture which states that he will return to the earth on a white horse. Thanks for the discussion.

 

[mkgal1]

No. I don't believe the millennium began in 70 AD.

I know. That's what I posted (that you do not believe the millennium began in 70 AD).

 

[mkgal1]

So is it logical to conclude that just because SOME Messianic prophecies have been fulfilled, then ALL Messianic prophecies have been fulfilled?

No. That's not what I'm suggesting. I'm trying to relay to you that a "partial preterist" is one that believes that SOME (not all) prophecies are in the past. That's it. That's all there is to it.

I think you're having difficulty understanding my view, because you're making assumptions about what I believe based on what you've heard/read about a person that believes one thing similar to me (but that doesn't mean that my other views line up with that person or group). That's [part of] the trouble with presumptions.

 

[Oldmantook]

No. That's not what I'm suggesting. I'm trying to relay to you that a "partial preterist" is one that believes that SOME (not all) prophecies are in the past. That's it. That's all there is to it.

I think you're having difficulty understanding my view, because you're making assumptions about what I believe based on what you've heard/read about a person that believes one thing similar to me (but that doesn't mean that my other views line up with that person or group). That's [part of] the trouble with presumptions.

The problem is that partial preterism means different things to different people. It's impossible for me to presume, when you don't totally lay out what you believe to be literal and what is figurative in your estimation. One partial preterist may take something be literal while another partial preterist may take it as symbolic. That is the reason why I believe partial preterism is a flawed hermeneutic. Certainly not the method I learned in seminary. Thanks for the discuss and we'll just have to leave it at that.

 

[mkgal1]

The problem is that partial preterism means different things to different people. It's impossible for me to presume, when you don't totally lay out what you believe to be literal and what is figurative in your estimation. One partial preterist may take something be literal while another partial preterist may take it as symbolic.

Well...that's been my point. We don't all fit into a box (but I've also tried to explain that -against your resistance to believe it- you are also a preterist if you only believe Jesus was the Messiah prophesied about in the Old Testament). To be fair, though.....you HAVE made a few presumptions in this thread.

That is the reason why I believe partial preterism is a flawed hermeneutic.

I haven't attended seminary - but I still don't think you're understanding what basic preterism is.

Certainly not the method I learned in seminary. Thanks for the discuss and we'll just have to leave it at that.

You're probably correct.

 

[Doulos 7]

Where is it in the Bible?

It isn't! We will be caught up to the Jesus on the last day! Note that this happens the same day that he wicked are caught up.

 

[mkgal1]

Note that this happens the same day that he wicked are caught up.

Where are you getting this idea from in Scripture?

 

[Doulos 7]

Where are you getting this idea from in Scripture?

All men will be judged by God, therefore the wicked will be taken up to a judgement of death.

 

[Doulos 7]

Where are you getting this idea from in Scripture?

All men will be judged by God, therefore the wicked will be taken up to a judgement of death.

 

[Petros2015]

Rapture spelled backwards is Eruption misspelled.

 

[mkgal1]

All men will be judged by God, therefore the wicked will be taken up to a judgement of death.

That doesn't answer my question as to where that idea was coming from in Scripture....but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[gordonhooker]

All men will be judged by God, therefore the wicked will be taken up to a judgement of death.

Saying it twice doesn't make it so.... still waiting for the scripture reference...

 

[Doulos 7]

Saying it twice doesn't make it so.... still waiting for the scripture reference...

I will answer you after you correctly answer my question! Where is the Denominational style of the rapture in the N.T.?

 

[gordonhooker]

I will answer you after you correctly answer my question! Where is the Denominational style of the rapture in the N.T.?

I have absolutely no idea what you are on about.