Antichrist one person?

parousia70 · Apr 7, 2002

Originally posted by Manifestation1*AD70

RKF if preterist are putting out trash as you say why then are so many futurist becoming preterist and not one preterist has returned to the futurist camp?

Please bless us with just one name of a preterist who basically found out the ptererist view was trash and returned to the futurist camp. Just one name and proof please.

I'd like to know that too!
I have searched and searched for an "ex preterist" and can't find a single one.
Most preterists I know are "ex futurists" however.

I find this to be a fascinating comentary on how the Holy spirit seems to be leading Christians in droves, away from futurism, yet has not led even one preterist that I can find, "back" into futurism.

Surley if futurism is true, there ought to be at least one "ex preterist" right?

Willis Deal · Apr 8, 2002

Funny how a thread can go in so many different directions so quickly. I don't even know where to begin.

I'll start with GW, since my original questions concerning the man of sin, and the beast who makes fire come down from heaven have gone for a week unanswered.

Manifestation, nice try bro, but you ended up pretty much confirming what I said, early church fathers recognized the destruction of Jerusalem as fulfillment of prophecy, but they were still looking forward to the return of Christ. I imagine if they'd put forth the idea that Christ had returned, was ruling and reigning, that the graves of the dead were empty etc. they would have been branded as heretics.

p70, I'm disappointed in you. Theology is not a popularity contest and we can't judge the validity of a viewpoint on how popular/unpopular it is or how rapidly it grows. The Holy Spirit has had two thousand years to consolodate believers into one particular belief system. If He was leading people to embrace preterism it would long ago have been the dominate viewpoint.

RKF · Apr 8, 2002

What you guys are preaching is trash, I don't believe that the early church preached any of this stuff. They knew better. Quoting those who you've named means nothing, God gave us his word to live by not Josephus or any one else. that's why the view that you are preaching isn't main stream. Your changing the word of God to validate your views. The fact is that your views are not Biblical!!! Saying that the great tribulation is over, No antichrist to come , No world government, no rapture, means No hope in GOD or his word

GW · Apr 8, 2002

Originally posted by Willis Deal
I'll start with GW, since my original questions concerning the man of sin, and the beast who makes fire come down from heaven have gone for a week unanswered.

Hi Willis Deal, and Christ's riches.

First, I have posted as I have had time to do so. Don't be impatient -- none of us are going to be raptured soon.

As I recall, you have read Gentry's pinpointing of Nero as 666 and the 6th Caesar of Rev 17:10. Next I have listed the meaning of the Mark and how St. John's original audience would have understood the meaning of his words about it. I have also shown that Antichrist, according to scripture, was a 1st century Church heresy (1 Jn 2:18-19) that taught that Christ's incarnation was not a true manifestation in human flesh (2 Jn 1:7; 1Jn 4:2-3) and that one could have Jehovah without having Jesus (1Jn 2:22-23). Finally I have shown that the Temple event of 2 Thess 2 was an event already underway at the time Paul wrote the passage. Therefore it cannot be something in our future, but was something in Paul's day.

Before I continue on, I'd like to hear you argue for why 2 Thessalonians 2 can be in our future. Paul's claim in the passage itself is that the son of perdition was already being restrained at that time from making his move to the Temple in Jerusalem. How can you claim to believe other than what Paul said on this fact? Not only was that man being restrained at that very time, but the Thessalonians KNEW who was restraining him! This clearly is speaking of a 1st century event and the onus is on futurists to find away around that serious challenge to their futurist views.

Originally posted by Willis Deal
I imagine if they'd put forth the idea that Christ had returned, was ruling and reigning, that the graves of the dead were empty etc. they would have been branded as heretics.

How much time have you spent studying the first few centuries of Church history? Did you read my quotes of Chrysostom and Athanasius? Scholars have rightly recognized that the earliest Church did NOT believe in the "TWO-ADVENTS" theory that was developed in the 2nd century by Justin and Irenaeus. Before the two-advent theory was invented in the second century it was thought that Messiah's visitation and the building of the Church had fully delivered the faith and realized the messianic hope:

Thomas F. Torrance
(On the birth of the "multiple advent" theory)

"It is important to recall that the apostolic witness to Christ did not speak of his advent (parousia), and more than of his kingdom (basileia), in the plural, for strictly speaking there is only one saving parousia of the Son which reaches from his coming in great humility to his coming again with great glory - "whose kingdom shall have no end." [Epiphanius, Anc., 110f; fidei, 17 and MPG, 42.885] The term parousia was used in the New Testament to speak of all three: the coming, arrival, and presence of Christ... His presence is an advent and his advent is a presence. "The hour comes and now is," as Jesus once said. [John 4:23] It is instructive to find that the plural word, "advents" or parousiai, was not found in Christian literature for more than a century after the ascension of Christ, when it was used to distinguish between his first coming and his second coming. In one revealing statement, however, Justin Martyr spoke of what takes place in the midst of Christ's parousia. In other words, here and now in the on-going life of the Church we live in the midst of the advent-presence of Christ, already partake of the great regeneration (paliggenesia) of the future, and share in its blessings with one another."
(Thomas F. Torrance, The Evangelical Theology of the Ancient Catholic Church. Edinboro: 1988. pp. 299,300. See also Justin Martyr, Apol., I.52; Dial., 14,32,40,49,51,etc.; Hippolytus, DeChr.. et ant., 44; In Dan., 4:18,23,39,etc.)

Other scholars agree that the early Church had plenty of representation for a fulfilled single Advent of Christ:

John N.D. Kelly
(On the First Century Christians' beliefs)

"..in the apostolic age, as the New Testament documents
reveal, the Church was pervaded with an intense conviction that
hope to which Israel had looked forward yearningly had at last
been fulfilled. ..history had reached its climax and the reign of
God, as so many of our Lord's parables imply, had been
effectively inaugurated." (pp. 459-461)

"..[but by the middle of the second century] the Christian's
confident and joyous assurance that the age to come has
already broken into the present age has faded into the
background. He looks upon God, not as the divine Father to
Whom he has free access, but as the sternly just distributor of
rewards and penalties, while grace has lost the primarily
eschatological character it had in the New Testament and has
become something to be acquired. ..the temptation to
degenerate into a pedestrian moralism in which the "realized"
element in its authentic eschatology finds no place was one to
which Christianity was a much exposed in the patristic as in
every other age." (pp.459-461)

"About the middle of the second century Christian eschatology
enters upon a new, rather more mature phase. ...Justin teaches
on the basis of Old Testament prophecy that, in addition to His
coming in lowliness at His incarnation, Christ will come again in
glory .. new emphases and fresh lines of thought begin to
appear, partly for apologetic motives and partly as the result of
growing speculation. The clash with Judaism and paganism
made it imperative to set out the bases of the revealed dogmas
more thoroughly. ..millenarianism, or the theory that the returned
Christ would reign on earth for a thousand years, came to find
increasing support among Christian teachers. We can observe
these tendencies at work in the Apologists. Justin, as we have
suggested, ransacks the Old Testament for proof, as against
Jewish critics, that the Messiah must have a twofold coming.
His argument is that, while numerous contexts no doubt predict
His coming in humiliation, there are others (e.g. Is. 53:8-12;
Ezek. 7f; Dan. 7:9-28; Zech. 12:10-12; Ps. 72:1-20; 110:1-7)
which clearly presuppose His coming in majesty and power.
The former coming was enacted at the incarnation, but the latter
still lies in the future. It will take place, he suggests, at
Jerusalem, where Christ will be recognized by the Jews who
dishonored Him as the sacrifice which avails for all penitent
sinners, and where He will eat and drink with His disciples; and
He will reign there a thousand years. This millenerians, or
"chialistic," doctrine was widely popular at this time. ..[But] he
confesses that he knows pious, pure-minded Christians who do
not share this belief.." (pp. 464-466)

So it is not at all correct to just assume that the early Church wasn't full of people who believed in a single fulfilled advent of Jesus Christ. The most we can say is that their view was not codified during the time of the creeds of the 300s. But the premillennialism of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Montanus, etc. was actually denounced as a heresy in 431 at the Council of Ephesus.

GW · Apr 8, 2002

by Willis Deal:
The Holy Spirit has had two thousand years to consolodate believers into one particular belief system. If He was leading people to embrace preterism it would long ago have been the dominate viewpoint.

Wait a minute...which viewpoint do you hold to and WHEN did your eschatological view come to dominate? From what I read you don't seem like you hold to the Historicist view, which the reformers developed in the 14-1600s. Nor do you seem to be of the Amillennial view which goes back to the earliest times but was spelled out most clearly by Augustine. If you are of the basic Left Behind teaching then MANY of your beliefs only go back as far as the 1800s!

The history of eschatological thinking in the Church shows that there simply has never been a single "orthodox" view nailed down yet that the Church can adopt as "sound doctrine." It has been largely resigned to a "non-essential" doctrine where one can have wide-ranging "liberty" on beliefs and still be accepted with most Churches.

RKF · Apr 8, 2002

I don't read any of these in the Bible.

RKF · Apr 8, 2002

Just because someone wrote about the church history doesn't make it God inspired

Example: History says that the USA didn't know Pearl Harbor was going to be attack and JFK was killed by Oswald. These are as we know untrue.

JohnR7 · Apr 8, 2002

Rev. 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

The Church age will end up, the way it started. The main difference between the beginning and the end of the age is that the annointings will be greater at the end. Even Moses said that the latter rain is greater then the first rain.

Even common sense tells you, if your growning a garden it does not take as much water to get the seeds started as it takes to get the fruit to mature. Mature fruit has a LOT of water in it, and this requires a LOT of the Holy Spirit to work in a person to produce that fruit.

(Even the end is contained in the beginning, so if you understand the beginning, then you will understand the end of this age of the gentiles.) Thanks, JohnR7

StogusMaximus · Apr 8, 2002

Originally posted by RKF
Example: History says that the USA didn't know Pearl Harbor was going to be attack and JFK was killed by Oswald. These are as we know untrue.

These are conspiracy theories, not known facts.

GW · Apr 8, 2002

Originally posted by RKF
Just because someone wrote about the church history doesn't make it God inspired

Alright, RKF. You don't want to look to HISTORY to find any fulfillments of bible prophecy. Strange, cause you'd have to dismiss a lot of fulfilled prophecies if you don't look to history to find fulfillments. And, you snub your nose at history but then you go combing through TODAY'S headlines to find fulfillments? How ironic. They don't call the Left Behind theology a "newspaper theology" for nuttin.' It is pure tabloid for sure.

Please give your interpretation of "soon" in the following passage:

Revelation 1:1
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place

--AND-

Explain how the event at the Temple spoken of in 2 Thess 2 can be in our future when it was taking place at the time Paul wrote.

Thanks.

RKF · Apr 8, 2002

It no use you guys won't except anything any way. BTW The knowledge of Pearl Harbor is fact

StogusMaximus · Apr 8, 2002

RFK,

I am praying for you.

I will pray that your eyes are opened to His Glory.

"The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make his face shine upon you and be gracious to you; the Lord turn his face toward you and give you peace." ' Numbers 6:24-26

parousia70 · Apr 8, 2002

Originally posted by RKF
Your changing the word of God to validate your views. The fact is that your views are not Biblical!!! Saying that the great tribulation is over, No antichrist to come , No world government, no rapture, means No hope in GOD or his word

Hmmm....
Lets examine just who is changing what here:

What scripture, RKF, prophesies a "one world government"?.

The Bible, and therefore preterism, teaches that the events of the Revelation of Jesus Christ were already underway at the time John wrote the Book and were to come to completion within the lifetime of the original recievers of the message.

Ignoring this fact is ignoring Gods word on the matter, and stripping all hope in our God.

If God failed to do what He said He'd do, WHEN He said He'd do it, then we might as well be atheists because we Have a God that can't be trusted to tell the truth.

Thankfully, our God did do exactly what He said, When He said, how He said. Preterism affirms the Hope that we have a God who can be trusted, a God who tells the truth.
Praise the Lord!

RKF · Apr 8, 2002

Daniel 7, Look at the beasts.
Revelations how can he be writing about something that was already under way? Then he would have been writting History.

parousia70 · Apr 8, 2002

Originally posted by Willis Deal

p70, I'm disappointed in you. Theology is not a popularity contest and we can't judge the validity of a viewpoint on how popular/unpopular it is or how rapidly it grows. The Holy Spirit has had two thousand years to consolodate believers into one particular belief system. If He was leading people to embrace preterism it would long ago have been the dominate viewpoint.

What I said is anticdotal and proves nothing. I just found it fascinating and wanted to share my fascination.

While I agree that theology is not a popularity contest, I am confused by how, in the same breath you say If preterism is right, more people would be preterist???!!! How does that make any sense?

P70

parousia70 · Apr 8, 2002

Originally posted by RKF
Daniel 7, Look at the beasts.
Revelations how can he be writing about something that was already under way? Then he would have been writting History.

Actually, History is something that has already come to pass. John was writing about things that were happening, not that "had happened".

The Book of Revelation is apostolic witness that the "day of Christ" had indeed come, was underway, and would be cmpleted "shortly", withinn the lifetime of those who first recieved the "urgent" message contained therein

GW · Apr 8, 2002

Originally posted by JohnR7
The Church age will end up, the way it started. The main difference between the beginning and the end of the age is that the annointings will be greater at the end. Even Moses said that the latter rain is greater then the first rain.

Hi John, and communion in the Holy Spirit.

The so-called Church age has no end and we are of the eternal Covenant priesthood of Melchizedek -- it is perfected and has no end:

Ephesians 3:21
Unto him be glory IN THE CHURCH by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.

Hebrews 7:14-17
For it is evident that our Lord has sprung out of Judah, as to which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood. This is yet more abundantly evident, if after the likeness of Melchizedek there arises another priest [Jesus Christ], who has been made, not after the law of a fleshly commandment, but after the power of an endless life: for it is testified, "YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER, ACCCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK ."

Our gospel of the Kingdom is the eternal gospel to be given among all peoples forever and ever:

Revelation 14:6
I saw another angel flying in mid heaven, HAVING AN ETERNAL GOSPEL TO PROCLAIM to those who dwell on the earth, and to every nation, tribe, language, and people

Brother, that's not future, that's here now and has been for 19 centuries.

Finally, don't forget that St. Peter's interpretation of Joel 2:28 was that it had a "last days" application which St. Peter says was coming to pass in the 1st century...

For these aren't drunken, as you suppose, seeing it is only the third hour of the day. But this is what has been spoken through the prophet Joel: 'It will be in the last days, says God, I will pour forth of my Spirit on all flesh. Your sons and your daughters will prophesy. Your young men will see visions. Your old men will dream dreams. (Acts 2:15-17)

The age of the Holy Spirit is eternal now that it has fully arrived back in the last days of the Old Testament period (John 14:16; 2 Cor 3:6-12).

GW · Apr 8, 2002

Originally posted by RKF
Daniel 7, Look at the beasts.
Revelations how can he be writing about something that was already under way? Then he would have been writting History.

Daniel taught that there were four kingdoms that were to dominate until Christ's kingdom was set up at the appointed time:

1. Babylon
2. Medo-Persia
3. Greece
4. Ancient Rome

Did the Messiah come and set up his Kingdom in the days of that fourth empire? Did it come on time? You bet it did. We know it from a very reliable source: Jesus.

Mark 1:14-15
Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, "The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand! Repent, and believe in the gospel."

GW · Apr 8, 2002

Dear Brother RKF:

We assert that your error lies in your continued refusal to accept the apostolic witness concerning the TIME of the last days events. St. John, under inspiration of the Holy Ghost, gave clear witness to the WHEN aspect of his vision -- in fact he starts off the book with his apostolic verification of the fact that the vision was for his own day:

Revelation 1:1,3
This is the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things WHICH MUST HAPPEN SOON... Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written in it, FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND.

They got this notion from Jesus Christ himself. Jesus, addressing his apostles, tells them:

Even so YOU also, WHEN YOU see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Most assuredly I tell you, this generation will not pass away, until all these things are accomplished.
--Matthew 24:33-34

These men were not false prophets. They understood the last days better than anyone, and we have their unanimous testimony throughout the entire N.T. that they were in the last days period at the time of their writing (Heb 1:1-2; 1 Cor 10:11; 1 Peter 1:20; Acts 2:15-17; James 5:3, etc.).

RKF · Apr 8, 2002

You preterest are utterly hopeless

Antichrist one person?

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Well-Known Member

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Similar threads