A Challenge to Futurists

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by parousia70


Just to be absolutely clear, You are incorrect in that statement. While Preterists place the fulfillment of  all "eschatology" in the past, we affirm that "Prophesy" continues to unfold and be fulfilled on a daily basis, into the future.

The point I believe  Manifest, Mike Buy-dler, etc were making is that when you take all the different verses that individual ECF's took a 'preterist' understanding of, and put them together, you'd have full preterism.

Thank you  parousia70  As you already know our fururist brothers also like to play like they are dom about these things also.
 
Upvote 0

davo

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2002
471
3
Visit site
✟1,104.00
Originally posted by Manifestation1*AD70
Could anything be clearer, simpler, or more straight forward? No matter how the futurist deny this truth, the facts still remains in history. The temple and the customs of Moses were indeed destroyed at his return.

Yes sir!! the Law of Death i.e., condemnation was swallowed up in the Law of LIFE in Christ Jesus!! :clap:

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law.

davo
 
Upvote 0
Mike

Christ was correct._ His prophecies did come true._ But certain individuals throughout church history couldn't_see the forest for the trees, and choose a different National Park to go wandering in: "Futurist National Park, here I come!"_

Hi Mike. I must say that the preterist post that I have read here so far do make some sense. As I said from the start we do know how to read your Bible. I am starting to see, what you mean in your statement about the futurist cannot see the forest for the trees.

Dose anyone here know were the idea about Jesus not returnig in the first century started? This would be a big help. Thank you.
 
Upvote 0

davo

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2002
471
3
Visit site
✟1,104.00
Originally posted by verizon1
I must say that the preterist post that I have read here so far do make some sense. As I said from the start we do know how to read your Bible. I am starting to see, what you mean in your statement about the futurist cannot see the forest for the trees.

Dose anyone here know were the idea about Jesus not returnig in the first century started? This would be a big help. Thank you.

G'day verizon1 :wave: The most probable explanation is that after the initial generation of believers died out, and persecution was still previlent against the church [now more so by Rome], believers started reading the promises of deliverence made to the disciples in terms of their own time frame and context -and so started drawing the dots together and assumed a future end for them -a natural, but misguided thing to do. All the way through church history [to lesser and greater degrees] this has happened -people not realising that Christ's Parousia was literal and spiritual in His coming in judgment on old covenant Judaism, the covenant of death.

2Cor 3:7-11 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, fading though it was, 8will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

That's just my take on it.

davo
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Manifestation1*AD70

This is a false statement.  Most Jews don't even believe that Jesus fulfilled the prophets concerning Israels Messiah.

That has nothing to do with what I was saying. Many Jews recognize the fulfillment of prophecy in the past, just not the one you're talking about.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by verizon1
npetreley
According to you, maybe. But that doesn't make it true.

So why the double standard? As you, have said, Your Jesus did not fulfill all the predictions about his coming.

You same scriptures also says when a prophet speaks for God the thing must be fulfilled in time Deu. 18. So why the double standard here?

You forgot the word "yet."
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by parousia70

The point I believe  Manifest, Mike Buy-dler, etc were making is that when you take all the different verses that individual ECF's took a 'preterist' understanding of, and put them together, you'd have full preterism.

As I've said elsewhere, I've given up. But I am nonetheless left speechless by the lengths to which you will go to manufacture support for a view that stands or falls by words like "this" and "you."
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by npetreley


As I've said elsewhere, I've given up. But I am nonetheless left speechless by the lengths to which you will go to manufacture support for a view that stands or falls by words like "this" and "you."

Lest see if your concept stands, or falls, by your own words as verizon1 puts it.  "It is as "you" said, Nevertheless, I say to "you," hereafter "you" will see the Son of Man, sttting at the right hand of the Poewr, and coming on the clouds of heaven." (Matthew 26:64)  Well Jesus told Caiaphas the High priest, "you" will see it so the futurist falls by your words.

Jesus speaking to his disciples said: "But when "you"  see Jesusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. verse 22 "For thsee are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled (Luke 21: 20-22)  Well Jesus told his disciples when "you" see Jerusalem surrounded by armies those were the day when all things written would be fulfilled which make the futurist view fall by your words.

Jesus speaking to his disciples again had this it say: "For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works.  "Assuredly, I say to "you" there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His Kingdom." (Matthew 16:27-28)  Well Jesus did say that his disciples "you" shall not tast death till they see the Son of Man coming which make your view fall by your own words.

Jesus speaking to his disciples again said: "When they persecute "you" in this city, flee to another, For assuredly, I say to "you" "you" will not have gone throught the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes (Matthew 10:23)  Well we see that Jesus told his disciples "you" will not have gone through the cities of Israel before he returned which make your view fall by your own words.

It makes one speechless by the lengths to which one will go to manufacture the support for the unbiblical teaditional teaching of men over the Words of God.  

One of the more astounding facets of preterism is the necessity to tell Christians that the Bible means what it says.  One might think that telling those who are not Christians that the Bible means what it says, but the biggest fracas, by far, occurs when dealing with our brothers and sisters in Christ who should believe the words of God.

It isn't that what the Bible says is so difficult to understand; a child can comprehend these words of Jesus.  What is the problem then?  The same as is was in Jesus day. The traditions of men have the power to make the Word of God of no effect (see MK.7:13)   One way for the traditions to nullify God's word is to take something simple and make it complicated. 

Futurism based on the traditions of men, robs christians of Biblical truth.  When they substtitute the traditional teaching of men, for divine inspiration they are the losers.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by verizon1
Mike

Christ was correct._ His prophecies did come true._ But certain individuals throughout church history couldn't_see the forest for the trees, and choose a different National Park to go wandering in: "Futurist National Park, here I come!"_

Hi Mike. I must say that the preterist post that I have read here so far do make some sense. As I said from the start we do know how to read your Bible. I am starting to see, what you mean in your statement about the futurist cannot see the forest for the trees.

Dose anyone here know were the idea about Jesus not returnig in the first century started? This would be a big help. Thank you.

Hi verizon1

The Jews never had the concept of a second coming, and since it was the Jews who first taught the notion of a Messiah via the Jewish prophets it seems quite reasonable to respect their inspired writtings more then our traditions or anyone else’s uninspired opinion today.

Was the (second advent) idea the original understand of the apostolic church, or was it just an invention of the mid-second century fathers? Notice what this writers says about this subject. (The thought of a postponement of the Parousia appears all through 2 Clement but here it is expressly mentioned for the first time. Thus about the middle of the second century a decisive turning point occurs one which can be compared in significance to all other great turning points, including the Reformation). Obviously we cannot fix this turning point precisely at the year 150 for it took a while until the thought caught hold every where.

(But a development does begin with the Shepherd of Hermas which could not be stopped a development at the end of which we stand today). As soon as the thought of a postponement of the Parousia was uttered once and indeed not only incidentally but thoroughly presented in an entire writing it developed its own life and power. At first people looked at it as only a brief postponement, as the Shepherd of Hermas clearly expressed.

But soon as the end of the world did not occur it was conceived of as a longer and longer period until finally this is today’s situation nothing but the thought of a postponement exists in people’s consciousness. [Kurt Aland. A History of Christianity. (2 vols) Vol 1 page 87-102].

These thing can be found by anyone who would like to know the truth about these things. How can we justify the second century brethren tampering with the clear words of Scripture like this?

It would have been batter for them to change their physical-literal interpretative method then to put the NT writers (and Jesus) in the position of false prediction. This is were the mistake was first made and it has affected Christianity ever since (as Kurt Aland has points out). His statement is just one of many which goes back in Christian history. Unfortunately this misunderstanding accursed before the creeds were developed, and were incorporated into them.

When the remaining fulfillments associated with Christ’s Parousia did not occur in the physical literal was they had expected they assumed that Christ had not returned at all. So they began adjusting their concept of the TIME of fulfillment instead of considering the possibility that their concepts of the NATURE of fulfillment were the only things needing adjustment.

It is time to get back to what the Bible says.  Jesus is indeed the God who cannot lie and he returned before his disciples died just as he said he would.  Caiaphas did see his return in judgement in 70 A.D. right on time, just as Jesus said he would.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
_The most probable explanation is that after the initial generation of believers died out, and persecution was still previlent against the church [now more so by Rome], believers started reading the promises of deliverence made to the disciples in terms of their own time frame and context -and so started drawing the dots together and assumed a future end for them -a natural, but misguided thing to do. All the way through church history [to lesser and greater degrees] this has happened -people not realising that Christ's Parousia was literal and spiritual in His coming in judgment on old covenant Judaism, the
covenant of death.

Thank you Davo and Mani I will do some looking into these things. They also make some sense to me. But what about the end of the word in the Bible?

Thanks
 
Upvote 0

Mike Beidler

Evolutionary Creationist
May 31, 2002
90
0
Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain
Visit site
✟7,786.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Originally posted by verizon1
But what about the end of the word in the Bible?

Where does the Bible speak of the "end of the world"?  That phrase actually uses the word "aeon," or "age," rather than "kosmos," or "world."

The Bible states time and time again that the earth is established forever.  It will not end.  Any passage that seems to say otherwise needs a closer look, especially in regards to the original languages and cultural contexts.
 
Upvote 0

Justme

Senior Veteran
Jun 20, 2002
2,984
50
western prairies
Visit site
✟6,941.00
Faith
Christian
Hi Mike,

I know what you mean, but there is:

Genesis 8
22 "As long as the earth endures,
seedtime and harvest,
cold and heat,
summer and winter,
day and night
will never cease."

Keyword there is 'endures.

Of course, there is 2 Peter 3 : 10 and then a few times it is mentioned" heaven and earth will pass away."
However, like you, I have read lots of verses that I would say mean this ball is in for the long haul.
There are plenty of commentaries explaining away the end of earth stuff, but little the other way.
I'm still looking, biblically. Scientifically, she's a gonner!

Takecare,
Justme
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Justme
Hi Mike,

I know what you mean, but there is:

Genesis 8
22 "As long as the earth endures,
seedtime and harvest,
cold and heat,
summer and winter,
day and night
will never cease."

Keyword there is 'endures.

Of course, there is 2 Peter 3 : 10 and then a few times it is mentioned" heaven and earth will pass away."
However, like you, I have read lots of verses that I would say mean this ball is in for the long haul.
There are plenty of commentaries explaining away the end of earth stuff, but little the other way.
I'm still looking, biblically. Scientifically, she's a gonner!

Takecare,
Justme

Hi Justme. The mane proplem with most commentaries today is that they are written by a futurist who does just that, explain away the end of earth.  Therefore God's people are left feeding on the chaff of men while the wheat in God's words goes un-noticed. 

Fortunately, we are not at the mercy of these imagined meanings. The Bible itself holds ample proof to dispel the lie of men.

Psalms 78:69 And he built his sanctuary like high palaces, like the (earth which he has established for ever).

Psalms 96:10 Say among the heathen that the Lord reigns (the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved).

Psalms 119:89-90 For ever O Lord thy word is settled in heaven, Thy faithulness is unto all generations thou has established the (earth and it abideth).

Ecclesiastes 1:4 One generation passeth away, and another generation come but (the earth abideth for ever).

Isaiah 45:17 But Israel shall be saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation you shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.

Now the New Testament Ephesians 3:21 unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus (throughout all ages, world without end Amen). JKV   These Scriptures tell us, the world will always go on. Then the heaven and earth to the Jews had another meaning then the literal heaven and earth which is also found in the holy scripture.
 
Upvote 0

Patmosman_sga

Active Member
Jun 17, 2002
375
3
59
Georgia
Visit site
✟783.00
Faith
Protestant
"End" does not necessarily have to mean "destruction." In fact, biblically speaking, it most often has to do with "completion" or "consummation." The Greek phrase "sunteleias tou aeonos" literally means "completion of the age." To loosely render this phrase as "end of the world" implies not a cosmic cataclysm resulting in the earth's destruction, but a transformation of the values and dynamics which shape the "world;" a transformation so radical that only apocalyptic language can describe it.

The New Testament uses apocalyptic language and imagery to inspire hope, not fear. It is the modern-day (false) prophets of doom who have misused this language to propagate false teachings about the destruction of the planet. The Church embodies the hope that God will redeem (has redeemed) his creation in and through the death and resurrection of Christ, not that he will one day destroy it and start over from scratch.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Originally posted by Patmosman_sga
"End" does not necessarily have to mean "destruction." In fact, biblically speaking, it most often has to do with "completion" or "consummation." The Greek phrase "sunteleias tou aeonos" literally means "completion of the age." To loosely render this phrase as "end of the world" implies not a cosmic cataclysm resulting in the earth's destruction, but a transformation of the values and dynamics which shape the "world;" a transformation so radical that only apocalyptic language can describe it.

The New Testament uses apocalyptic language and imagery to inspire hope, not fear. It is the modern-day (false) prophets of doom who have misused this language to propagate false teachings about the destruction of the planet. The Church embodies the hope that God will redeem (has redeemed) his creation in and through the death and resurrection of Christ, not that he will one day destroy it and start over from scratch.

Thanks for that in put Patmosman_sga .  And again, there was hot a sound in all the heavens.
 
Upvote 0

davo

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2002
471
3
Visit site
✟1,104.00
Originally posted by Patmosman_sga
"End" does not necessarily have to mean "destruction." In fact, biblically speaking, it most often has to do with "completion" or "consummation." The Greek phrase "sunteleias tou aeonos" literally means "completion of the age." To loosely render this phrase as "end of the world" implies not a cosmic cataclysm resulting in the earth's destruction, but a transformation of the values and dynamics which shape the "world;" a transformation so radical that only apocalyptic language can describe it. 

James, this is the essence of what the preterist postion is saying about Matt 24:3  "sunteleias tou aeonos"

"Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"

davo
 
Upvote 0
I now have a open question to anyone who is a futurist since npetreley does not have the guts to answer my question.

Are we to believe what is written in Deu 18? Are we to believe this is the word of God also? Are we to believe and really trust what is written there. Did God realy mean what he said there, that we are to use that concept to tell a false prophet. Can we believe that is the word of God there?
 
Upvote 0
Where are all the futurists Christians when a person who is not a Christian ask a biblical question that can make their believe system fall or fly? Christians have always told us that we should believe (all the Bible).

God has a way in Deu. 18:21-22 to tell a false prophet. And Jesus said to his disciples that they, would not have gone through the cities of Israel before his second return. (Matthew 10:23)

My question to you futurists Christians is this. Should we believe what God said in Deu. 18 about false prophets.
When you do not answer our questions to you at all, makes us believe we cannot trust you, or your Bible at all. Should we believe what God said in Deu. 18: 21-22.

So fare it seem to us that the preterist Christians are the only ones who really know, and understand, their Bible.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Originally posted by verizon1
Where are all the futurists Christians when a person who is not a Christian ask a biblical question that can make their believe system fall or fly? Christians have always told us that we should believe (all the Bible).

God has a way in Deu. 18:21-22 to tell a false prophet. And Jesus said to his disciples that they, would not have gone through the cities of Israel before his second return. (Matthew 10:23)

My question to you futurists Christians is this. Should we believe what God said in Deu. 18 about false prophets.
When you do not answer our questions to you at all, makes us believe we cannot trust you, or your Bible at all. Should we believe what God said in Deu. 18: 21-22.

So fare it seem to us that the preterist Christians are the only ones who really know, and understand, their Bible.

Hi verizon1 good to see your still looking into Christianity.  There is really a lot at stake here in your questions.  The truth is they can answer your questions.  Why?  Because if they answer yes and say you can believe Deu. 18 then it appears that Jesus is indeed a false prophet.  And on the other hand, if they answer no then it appears that you cannot trust Deu. 18 to be the word of God.

So you see there really a lot at stake here.    Scripture (and God who gave it) are the ONLY absolute and Final authority.  It is not a matter of either/or.  Scripture is both the only (absolute) AND the final authority. Nothing else comes close.   Only scripture (sola scriptura) can provide the "straight rulr" to determine orthodxy.

The traditional doctrines stands or falls eclusively on the basis of Scripture alone.   I feel extremely uncomfortable letting a group of fallible uninspired men decide by majority vote what I have to believe.  Jesus is the same God, who rides the clouds in the Old Testament and if he told Caiaphas (he would see it) it happen and we preterist believe it. Only Scripture can serve that function.

It is okay to say "I believe a certain set of doctrines.  But when we start placing the traditional teaching of men over the words of God we have gone too far.   Too many of the earhy church's doctrines have turned out to be misguided.   So to answer your questions yes you can believe Deu.18 and the words of Jesus.

  

 

To say otherewise is to denigrate the authority of God and His Word. 
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.