Preterist interpretation of events?

These events didn't happen yet obviously, I know you want the Preterist guys to answer, but there is no documented evidence of any of this happening

I am curious as to their response also.

Originally posted by npetreley
Can anyone point me to a site/article/series/whatever that describes how preterists assign various prophecies to actual events or even spiritual/symbolic interpretation?

I'm looking for explanations of things like (assuming it's all past) when the sun went dark and the moon turned the color of blood -- when the two witnesses manipulated weather, were killed, and people of the world celebrated by giving each other gifts -- when every living creature in the sea died -- when the Euphrates dried up, and that sort of thing.

Click to expand...

G'day npetreley There is bulk reading at this link:

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Preterism/

davo

Originally posted by npetreley
How did the "times of the gentiles" become the Jewish age?

Click to expand...

npetreley, good question. The Jewish age was the age of the Old Covenant and Paul refers to it a number of times as "this age":

1Cor 2:8 "which none of the rulers [Jewish hierarchy] of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."

Gal 1:4 "who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father."

This is also reflected in what Jesus said about the times:

Matthew 12:39 But He answered and said to them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.

This "time" or "age" was the biblical "last days" or as Paul says in Gal 4:4 "the fulness of time."

It was in the 'end-game' of the old covenant that the Gentiles were coming to fulfilness -fulfilness has nothing to do with numerics, numbers are not the is, maturity is the issue -fulness speaks of maturity:

Gal 4:19 My little children, for whom I labor in birth again until Christ is formed in you [they were already saved -this speaks of maturation. Eph 4:13-14]

Israel being trodden down until the time of the Gentile is fulfilled speaks both of the Roman captivity and destruction against Israel, along with the maturing work of the Holy Spirit in Gentile believers until the end, when being fully grafted in "all Israel would be saved" Rom 11 -it was the Gospel of Christ that grafted the Gentiles [aliens to the covenants of promise] into the Commonwealth of Israel. Without Israel the Gentiles remained lost, for salvation was of [by way of the covenants] the Jews.

davo

If I may interject...

A quick comparason of scripture should tell us just how long the "times of the gentiles" was.

Luke 21:24b
"Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled."

compare to:

Revelation 11:12

But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.

Unless somebody can show that these two verses are not speaking of the "same event", the inescapable conclusion is that the 'times of the gentiles' were fulfilled 42 months after Jerusalem was given over to them to trample.

History confirms that the Roman-Jewish war lasted exactly 42 months, exactly as prophesied.

The "times of the Gentiles" are fulfilled.

I agree with that npetreley. Don't you P70 and davo?

Originally posted by npetreley
Can anyone point me to a site/article/series/whatever that describes how preterists assign various prophecies to actual events or even spiritual/symbolic interpretation?

I'm looking for explanations of things like (assuming it's all past) when the sun went dark and the moon turned the color of blood -- when the two witnesses manipulated weather, were killed, and people of the world celebrated by giving each other gifts -- when every living creature in the sea died -- when the Euphrates dried up, and that sort of thing.

Click to expand...

You can also check out this site http://www.1newjerusalemministries.com/index.html

Originally posted by npetreley
The temple was destroyed AD 70 Av, which may be what you're thinking, but I don't know exactly which month in AD 66 the seige started, so it's hard for me to confirm or deny that it was exactly 42 months. Nevertheless, the "Jewish Age" seems to have lasted at least until AD 130, and seems to be starting over again now.

Click to expand...

"Nevertheless, the "Jewish Age" seems to have lasted..." Actually npetreley "covenantally speaking" no it didn't. From a biblical perspective Israel covenantally was cut-off in the midst of that week 66-73AD i.e., 42 months etc.

davo

Here is why systematic approaches to eschatology are so wrought with difficulty. For every argument "proving" that "events" happened exactly as prophesied, there is always a counter-argument "proving" inconsistencies in the timeline. This is true of preterism as well as historicism and futurism.

If the systematic approach were the only one available, preterism would be the only valid option because it is the only interpretation which has a real, rather than a contrived, point of reference. If God's plan for the redemption of the world were confined to history, then we would have no choice but to say that plan was completed in the events which took place roughly between 4 B.C. (birth of Christ) and A.D.70 (fall of Jerusalem).

But God's plan of redemption is no mere temporal reality. It is an eternal reality and, as such, transcends history while, at the same time, encompassing and consummating it. Historical "events" point us to the final "end," but are not the "end" in themselves. Ultimately, all prophecy is fulfilled, all things are restored, and all creation is redeemed not in "events," but in a Person, Jesus Christ, who has been revealed in history as the eternal King of kings and Lord of lords.

The validity or usefulness of any eschatological system is determined by whether or not its aim and goal is to lead people to a deeper understanding of God's ultimate victory in Jesus Christ, who is King of kings and Lord of lords right now. If anyone denies this basic truth, their problem lies not in their eschatology, but in their Christology and, most likely, in their whole doctrine of God.

James, thankyou for your insightful and balanced post -and yes indeed it is the testimony of Jesus that is the spirit of prophecy.

davo

The validity or usefulness of any eschatological system is determined by whether or not its aim and goal is to lead people to a deeper understanding of God's ultimate victory in Jesus Christ, who is King of kings and Lord of lords right now. If anyone denies this basic truth, their problem lies not in their eschatology, but in their Christology and, most likely, in their whole doctrine of God.

Click to expand...

This sounds great and I agree doctrine is the MOST important thing, but is Christ returning in the flesh in the future?

And I hope this doesn't say that futurists have a problem with doctrine.

Originally posted by GTX


This sounds great and I agree doctrine is the MOST important thing, but is Christ returning in the flesh in the future?

And I hope this doesn't say that futurists have a problem with doctrine.

Click to expand...

GTX you are starting to remind me of one of those birds that men have taught to repeat their words. Before anyone in our day and time can assign verses in the New Testament about the Lord's return to our future, they must first prove that the (Old Testament Prophets ) clearly distinguished between two different coming of Christ.

Originally posted by GTX


This sounds great and I agree doctrine is the MOST important thing, but is Christ returning in the flesh in the future?

Click to expand...

If by "in the flesh" you mean to imply Christ taking on again the likeness of sinful humanity, then your expectations concerning the second coming are way too low. The second coming is not about Christ lowering himself again to our level. It is, rather, about Christ raising us up (that is, resurrecting us) to his level--the perfect image and likeness of God, reflecting his glory in every aspect of our being.

Originally posted by Patmosman_sga


If by "in the flesh" you mean to imply Christ taking on again the likeness of sinful humanity, then your expectations concerning the second coming are way too low. The second coming is not about Christ lowering himself again to our level. It is, rather, about Christ raising us up (that is, resurrecting us) to his level--the perfect image and likeness of God, reflecting his glory in every aspect of our being.

Click to expand...

I agree Patmosman well said.

Originally posted by npetreley


That should be pretty easy, since there are prophecies of the Christ being humiliated, stricken, and hated, and there are prophecies of the Christ as the eternal King, etc. You'd have to say the former is literal and the latter is spiritual to see them as a single coming. Then you'd have to explain why Jesus Himself said He was returning, and explained how He would return (Matthew 24):



I keep checking my history books, but I still haven't found that event recorded anywhere, and that just doesn't seem like the kind of thing people would gloss over and forget to write about.

Click to expand...

If it is so easy, as you said please show my as I have asked where does the OT prophets distinguish between "a coming in redemption" versus "a coming in judgment?" This king of language is not used by the Jewish prophets. (see Isa. 35:4-6, 40:10-11, 61:1-2, 62:11, 63:1-6, 66:6-16; Zech. 14; and Mal.4:1-6) Since it is so easy fore you please show me from the Old Testament.

Originally posted by Patmosman_sga


If by "in the flesh" you mean to imply Christ taking on again the likeness of sinful humanity, then your expectations concerning the second coming are way too low. The second coming is not about Christ lowering himself again to our level. It is, rather, about Christ raising us up (that is, resurrecting us) to his level--the perfect image and likeness of God, reflecting his glory in every aspect of our being.

Click to expand...

Christ will return in sinless Glory to claim his bride, Christ will not return in "sinful" flesh.

Actually my expectations are much higher than the preterists, preterists believe Christ is already here.

This is an ugly world, when Christ returns it will be an obvious glorious event which all men will witness, not just a select few, also we will not have to give in to the fact that the second coming has already happened and believe if you pray to be enlightened to the fact Jesus has already returned.

When Christ returns, every man, woman and child will physically see this event, this clearly VERY CLEARLY hasn't happened. Jesus will decend from the heavens so every eye will see him. To reduce this promise to return to only being visible to preterists is not right.

It will be a physical event, no one will have any doubts, the fact that people have doubts now, is a clear indication this second coming hasn't happened yet.

Sorry, I will humble myself and say that I am not as armed with self interpreted scripture as some of the preterists here, I know my scripture but I have not dissected it and decided I have the divine wisdom to make the assumption that Jesus' return will be spiritual. I believe it as I see it, and the way I see it, it will be a physical return.

The day I see humbleness in a preterist, and see that a preterist can consider that Christ has not returned yet, is the day I will consider seeing this from a preterist angle. And stop seeing preterism as 1 dimensional misinterpretation.

Most of the preterists are so high and mighty they believe their word is infallible and any other view is folly.

Originally posted by GTX

When Christ returns, every man, woman and child will physically see this event, this clearly VERY CLEARLY hasn't happened. Jesus will decend from the heavens so every eye will see him. To reduce this promise to return to only being visible to preterists is not right.

Click to expand...

Here is a classic example of the interpretive error known as apocalypticism, that is, in the words of N.T. Wright, the exploitation "of apocalyptic language to express a non-biblical dualism in which the heavenly world is good and the earthly bad." In its proper biblical context, apocalyptic language is used (by Paul, Peter, John and the synoptic authors) to draw attention to the heavenly significance of earthly events. In other words, the full significance of seemingly ordinary "events" is often explained with the language of cosmic cataclysm. For what fallen human beings may see as ordinary or mundane, God sees as literally shaking the earth and the heavens to their very foundation.

For instance, when the seventy-two returned to Jesus proclaiming, "Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!" (Luke 10:17), Jesus responded, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven" (v. 18). In other words, in preaching the Gospel of the kingdom of God, healing the sick and casting out demons, the seventy-two were participants in the ongoing cosmic battle of which, from the foundation of the world, Jesus is the victor and Satan is the vanquished. The actual "events" themselves may have looked rather tame (although casting out demons can cause quite a stir), but the ultimate reality behind these temporal "events" was and is the final victory of God in Christ over Satan and the forces of evil--a victory decreed from eternity and seen in the temporal sphere every time a sinner repents, every time a disease is healed, every time a demoniac is delivered. That is, every time the Gospel of God's kingdom of redemption and wholeness is proclaimed, Satan's kingdom of bondage and brokenness is destroyed.

When Scripture employs apocalyptic language to describe "the coming of the Son of Man," it should likewise be understood to be describing an ultimate reality from the perspective of heaven. Indeed, if we read Matthew 24-25 as a complete unit we find, in the parable of the Last Judgment (25:31-46), that "the Son of man" will judge each and every one of us according to how we responded to his "coming" to us as one of "the least of these." To be "ready" for his coming is not to have our eyes fixed permanently on the sky (the Apostles were rebuked for this very thing), but to train our eyes so as to be able to see his glory in the face of a beggar asking for food and drink or the stranger seeking shelter for the night. We must look for the parousia in the minutiae of everyday life. We dare not risk standing in judgment only to find that the One sitting on the throne is that poor stranger we turned away one cold winter night.