Partial Preterism and dating revelation

Deborah~

Christ our Passover
Feb 18, 2017
99
33
Mobile, AL
✟22,048.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Thx Deborah

So this explanation differs somewhat from what Parousia70 posted about Menahem...

If either this Simon or Menahem was THE MAN OF SIN/SON OF PERDITION

who was the RESTRAINER who continued to restrain from the time Paul wrote til he was "taken out of the way"?
In the months leading up to the revolt there were a number of influential people who were advising against open rebellion against Rome. The government in Jerusalem, composed mostly of the priestly ruling class and the elders of the nation, were much more moderate than their hot headed Zealot counterparts, and they were able to control the various factions to a point. But when the nation was plunged into open revolt in A.D. 66, the leader of the Sicarii, a man named Menahem who was the grandson of Judas the Galilean, founder of the Zealot party (mentioned in another poster's comments but not to be confused with the 8th century B.C. Menahem who was the 19th King of Israel), brought an armed force into Jerusalem and overthrew the government. After some success his faction was overcome by the captain of the temple guard, Eleazar, leader of the moderate governing class and son of the High Priest whom Menahem had assassinated.
So while I would not want to posit any one particular person that Paul was referring to as restraining the forces that were for open war, certainly it was the religious and civil authorities in Jerusalem who successfully restrained the Zealots for the months leading up to the revolt but there was such a strong messianic fervor in these years (popular messianic expectation was rampant) and coupled with the mismanagement by Rome, the situation deteriorated to the point of open rebellion. Once the government was overthrown in the first year of the revolt, the situation in Galilee and Judea plunged into chaos and destruction.
In Christ,
Deborah ~
 
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,089
2,040
Texas
✟95,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
thx again Deborah

Indeed, positing ONE PARTICULAR PERSON for either Son of Perdition or The Restrainer is difficult, its ambiguous because the restrainer is both a WHAT and a WHO, both a HE and a THAT WHICH

more info on both Simon and Menahem would be appreciated
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,588
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
I see Preterism as a valid, lucid way of understanding Revelation. The pieces tend to fit well.

As to authorial intent, I believe it's quite likely that St. John the Revelator was laying out an exposition of events, not all of which were yet future at the time of writing.

One of the most in-depth expositions/studies of Partial Preterism (or "Orthodox Preterism") I've ever found is http://tektonics.org/eschhub.html and it has many insights which (1) explain the Partial Preterist view and (2) does so while answering the common Futurist view(s), particularly Pre-Trib/Dispensationalist/Left Behind type stuff. Recommended!

ETA- Preterism as a system doesn't necessarily eliminate the possibility of a dual fulfillment some time in the future. But, and this is crucial, a future fulfillment is not required. So many of these things may see a repeated fulfillment in the future and that doesn't mean Preterism is wrong. We (or I) simply believe it doesn't have to happen again in the future since it has already happened once.
Well said......
.......
ETA- Preterism as a system doesn't necessarily eliminate the possibility of a dual fulfillment some time in the future. But, and this is crucial, a future fulfillment is not required. So many of these things may see a repeated fulfillment in the future and that doesn't mean Preterism is wrong. We (or I) simply believe it doesn't have to happen again in the future since it has already happened once.
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
There can be no doubt that the overwhelming majority of ancient sources date the Revelation during the time of Domatian. Preterists claim that these are all based on the words of Irenaeus, which they imagine to be of doubtful meaning. But a careful analysis of the statements of these various ancient writers makes it clear that they were based on an absolute minimum of four different original sources.

But only Preterists even care when it was written. For if the meaning was the distant future, a difference of 20 to 30 years in when it was written is totally trivial.

Even honest Preterist writers admit that the weight of historical evidence is on the side of the late date, and say that the REAL evidence of its date is the "internal evidence." But the problem with that is that ALL of this "internal evidence" is ONLY evidence IF their interpretations of its meanings are first assumed. This elliptical logic is a critical error at the very heart of the entire Preterist system of interpretation. For in order to assume that most of the prophecies can be demonstrated to have been fulfilled is to begin with an assumption that they simply do not mean what they actually say.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Berean Tim
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,588
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
There can be no doubt that the overwhelming majority of ancient sources date the Revelation during the time of Domatian. Preterists claim that these are all based on the words of Irenaeus, which they imagine to be of doubtful meaning. But a careful analysis of the statements of these various ancient writers makes it clear that they were based on an absolute minimum of four different original sources.

But only Preterists even care when it was written. For if the meaning was the distant future, a difference of 20 to 30 years in when it was written is totally trivial.

Even honest Preterist writers admit that the weight of historical evidence is on the side of the late date, and say that the REAL evidence of its date is the "internal evidence." But the problem with that is that ALL of this :internal evidence" is ONLY evidence IF their interpretations of its meanings are first assumed. This elliptical logic is a critical error at the very heart of the entire Preterist system of interpretation. For in order to assume that most of the prophecies can be demonstrated to have been fulfilled is to begin with an assumption that they simply do not mean what they actually say.
I am a preterist and I could care less when it was written or visioned but what it symbolizes.

It is the Jews of today that should be reading it, as it is mainly about them anyway.............
Here is another version of Revelation:

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0831.htm


After the taking up of our Lord Jesus Christ, I John was alone upon Mount Tabor, where also He showed us His undefiled Godhead;
and as I was not able to stand, I fell upon the ground, and prayed to the Lord, and said: O Lord my God, who hast deemed me worthy to be Your servant, hear my voice, and teach me about Your coming...................

Tabor is actually mentioned in the OT

https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/search.cfm?Criteria=tabor&t=NKJV&ss=1#s=s_primary_0_1
"tabor" occurs 12 times in 12 verses

Judges 4:14
Then Deborah said to Barak, “Up! For this is the day in which the LORD has delivered Sisera into your hand. Has not the LORD gone out before you?”
So Barak went down from Mount Tabor with ten thousand men following him.


Jeremiah 46:18

As I live,” says the King,
Whose name is the LORD of hosts,
“Surely as Tabor is among the mountains
And as Carmel by the sea, so he shall come.

Hosea 5:1
“Hear this, O priests!
Take heed, O house of Israel!
Give ear, O house of the king!
For yours is the judgment,
Because you have been a snare to Mizpah
And a net spread on Tabor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Tabor

Mount Tabor (Hebrew: הר תבור‬, Modern Har Tavor, Tiberian Har Tāḇôr, Greek Όρος Θαβώρ) is located in Lower Galilee, Israel, at the eastern end of the Jezreel Valley, 11 miles (18 km) west of the Sea of Galilee.

In the Hebrew Bible (Joshua, Judges), Mount Tabor is the site of the Battle of Mount Tabor between the Israelite army under the leadership of Barak and the army of the Canaanite king of Hazor, Jabin, commanded by Sisera.

In Christian tradition, Mount Tabor is the site of the Transfiguration of Jesus.[1]
...........................

The mountain is mentioned for the first time in the Hebrew Bible, in Joshua 19:22, as border of three tribes: Zebulun, Issachar and Naphtali. The mountain's importance stems from its strategic control of the junction of the Galilee's north-south route with the east-west highway of the Jezreel Valley.

According to the Book of Judges, Hazor was the seat of Jabin, the king of Canaan, whose commander, Sisera, led a Canaanite army against the Israelites. Deborah the Jewish prophetess summoned Barak of the tribe of Naphtali and gave him God's command, "Go and draw toward mount Tabor, and take with thee ten thousand men of the children of Naphtali and of the children of Zebulun" (Judges).4:6). Descending from the mountain, the Israelites attacked and vanquished Sisera and the Canaanites.




 
Upvote 0

DaDad

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 28, 2017
1,142
142
71
Southwest
✟85,284.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That we are currently at Revelation 20:7 is my view as well, although I have arrived at that view through my own study of New Testament history so I'm not familiar with all the teachers everyone cites and I get lost with all the various terms.:scratch:
But there is little in the way of Bible study that has done more to build up my faith than seeing the hand of God at work in history in how He brought to pass so very many prophecies at the time and in the very manner He had foretold.
In Christ,
Deborah ~

“[The] five of whom are fallen [presumes John’s work to be written in] Vespasian’s reign. Titus is to come, but only to last for a short time. Perhaps the writer knew of the hopeless condition of Titus’ health. He is therefore either using a literary convention, and assuming an earlier date than is the fact to give his words the force of a prophecy concerning Titus, or, more likely, his is using here material written in Vespasian’s reign which partly suits his purpose and partly not; for there are very good reasons for thinking that this book was written, not in Vespasian’s reign, but in Domitian’s.”[1]
[1] Eiselen, Lewis, & Downey, p. 1392​

Funny how a little light can pierce the darkness of ignorance. Most Commentators typically aren't so forthright, and they simply give you lies so that you'll think they're smart. It's too bad they have no clue as to the TRUTH of Scripture as confirmed by History.

So many Christians remain in the dark.

Thanks,
DaDad
 
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,089
2,040
Texas
✟95,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
This is weird, a thread from three years ago now revived. Was Full Preterism even forbidden back then?

I don't think Partials are as hung up on dates written, and I don't think we can know for sure if Nero or Domitian was reigning when John was on Patmos.
 
Upvote 0

Berean Tim

Well-Known Member
Mar 19, 2017
577
207
67
Houston TX
✟146,731.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
“[The] five of whom are fallen [presumes John’s work to be written in] Vespasian’s reign. Titus is to come, but only to last for a short time. Perhaps the writer knew of the hopeless condition of Titus’ health. He is therefore either using a literary convention, and assuming an earlier date than is the fact to give his words the force of a prophecy concerning Titus, or, more likely, his is using here material written in Vespasian’s reign which partly suits his purpose and partly not; for there are very good reasons for thinking that this book was written, not in Vespasian’s reign, but in Domitian’s.”[1]
[1] Eiselen, Lewis, & Downey, p. 1392​

Funny how a little light can pierce the darkness of ignorance. Most Commentators typically aren't so forthright, and they simply give you lies so that you'll think they're smart. It's too bad they have no clue as to the TRUTH of Scripture as confirmed by History.

So many Christians remain in the dark.

Thanks,
DaDad
“[The] five of whom are fallen [presumes John’s work to be written in] Vespasian’s reign. Titus is to come, but only to last for a short time. Perhaps the writer knew of the hopeless condition of Titus’ health. He is therefore either using a literary convention, and assuming an earlier date than is the fact to give his words the force of a prophecy concerning Titus, or, more likely, his is using here material written in Vespasian’s reign which partly suits his purpose and partly not; for there are very good reasons for thinking that this book was written, not in Vespasian’s reign, but in Domitian’s.”[1]
[1] Eiselen, Lewis, & Downey, p. 1392​

Funny how a little light can pierce the darkness of ignorance. Most Commentators typically aren't so forthright, and they simply give you lies so that you'll think they're smart. It's too bad they have no clue as to the TRUTH of Scripture as confirmed by History.

So many Christians remain in the dark.

Thanks,
DaDad
Why conclude that the beast in Revelation is all Rome. Daniel in chapter 7 has 4beast with a total of seven heads and ten horns. Their all different kingdoms
 
Upvote 0

DaDad

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 28, 2017
1,142
142
71
Southwest
✟85,284.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why conclude that the beast in Revelation is all Rome. Daniel in chapter 7 has 4beast with a total of seven heads and ten horns. Their all different kingdoms

I REFUTED the purported Rev. 17 "Rome - fulfillment". But to presume that Daniel and Revelation are disconnected is an equal mistake:

1. Gold, Babylon -- 1 of 5 has fallen
2. Silver, Medo/Persia-- 2 of 5 has fallen
3. Bronze, Greece-- 3 of 5 has fallen
4. Iron, Rome-- 4 of 5 has fallen
-- Clay, "Divided Kingdom"
-- 5. Lion/Eagle, U.K./U.S. -- 5 of 5 has fallen from pre-eminence
-- 6. Bear, Russia -- "one is" when it attacks Israel
-- 7. Leopard (actually a "Tiger"), China -- "yet to come and shall remain a little while"
-- 8. "Dreadful", United Nations -- "an eighth that was and is not" because it has NO Geography, NO Populous, NO Army, etc.​

It's all quite clear.

And it's a simple explanation as to why there are TEN Horns and SEVEN Diadems in Rev. 12, but TEN Horns and TEN Diadems in Rev. 13.

Thanks,
DaDad
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
This is weird, a thread from three years ago now revived. Was Full Preterism even forbidden back then?

I don't think Partials are as hung up on dates written, and I don't think we can know for sure if Nero or Domitian was reigning when John was on Patmos.
Here is a short summation from my rather long paper titled:
"Why Historians Date the Revelation to the Reign of Domitian."

"In conclusion, during the second through the fifth centuries at least seven Christian writers clearly stated facts that date the Revelation to within the reign of Domitian, including details that demonstrate at least four independent sources of information. Two early writers said things that could be interpreted to mean it was written earlier, but that is not a necessary conclusion from any statement made by either of them. There are only two clearly stated comments about an earlier date. One of these was made by a writer noted for historical errors. And the other comes from an eighth or seventh century copy made by an ignorant and careless scribe “given to arbitrary alteration of the text before him.” So all solid and reliable evidence points to the Revelation having been given in the later years of Domitian.

"At the time Jerusalem was destroyed, the emperor of Rome was Vespasian. About nine years later he was succeeded by his son Titus, the one who had previously conquered Jerusalem. Titus ruled from approximately A.D. 79 to 81, to be succeeded by Domitian about eleven years after Jerusalem was destroyed. Domitian ruled until approximately A.D. 96, some 26 years after Jerusalem was destroyed. “Toward the end of Domitian's reign,” as Irenaeus put it, would be a few years earlier. And that is why most scholars conclude that the Revelation was written sometime between A.D. 92 and 94, with most favoring the later date."
 
  • Like
Reactions: keras
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

Berean Tim

Well-Known Member
Mar 19, 2017
577
207
67
Houston TX
✟146,731.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I REFUTED the purported Rev. 17 "Rome - fulfillment". But to presume that Daniel and Revelation are disconnected is an equal mistake:

1. Gold, Babylon -- 1 of 5 has fallen
2. Silver, Medo/Persia-- 2 of 5 has fallen
3. Bronze, Greece-- 3 of 5 has fallen
4. Iron, Rome-- 4 of 5 has fallen
-- Clay, "Divided Kingdom"
-- 5. Lion/Eagle, U.K./U.S. -- 5 of 5 has fallen from pre-eminence
-- 6. Bear, Russia -- "one is" when it attacks Israel
-- 7. Leopard (actually a "Tiger"), China -- "yet to come and shall remain a little while"
-- 8. "Dreadful", United Nations -- "an eighth that was and is not" because it has NO Geography, NO Populous, NO Army, etc.​

It's all quite clear.

And it's a simple explanation as to why there are TEN Horns and SEVEN Diadems in Rev. 12, but TEN Horns and TEN Diadems in Rev. 13.

Thanks,
DaDad
Thanks. Im new to posting wasn't actually asking just you. Perhaps a separate post is needed. Sorry if you felt I was jabbing at you
 
Upvote 0

DaDad

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 28, 2017
1,142
142
71
Southwest
✟85,284.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thanks. Im new to posting wasn't actually asking just you. Perhaps a separate post is needed. Sorry if you felt I was jabbing at you

Hi BT,
All is good, and you might want to make a note for your records regarding my Reply, because it's not only correct, but it should help as a path for your future reference!

With Best Regards,
DaDad
 
Upvote 0

Hazelelponi

:sighing:
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
9,357
8,758
55
USA
✟687,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
For in order to assume that most of the prophecies can be demonstrated to have been fulfilled is to begin with an assumption that they simply do not mean what they actually say.

Can you give me a prophecy that didn't need its RL meaning interpreted by God?

If we were to be literalist then the Pharaohs dream of fat and skinny cows would be just that.. dreaming of cows. But no, such a prophecy needed interpretation for it to be understood.

The Messiah was killed because so few understood the prophecies relating to His coming

And let us not forget the words mene mene tekel upharsin

Prophecy is not a book to be read, its interpretation comes from God alone. I believe Jesus was very clear with His followers in that day. They were not at all cofused.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Can you give me a prophecy that didn't need its RL meaning interpreted by God?

If we were to be literalist then the Pharaohs dream of fat and skinny cows would be just that.. dreaming of cows. But no, such a prophecy needed interpretation for it to be understood.

The Messiah was killed because so few understood the prophecies relating to His coming

And let us not forget the words mene mene tekel upharsin

Prophecy is not a book to be read, its interpretation comes from God alone. I believe Jesus was very clear with His followers in that day. They were not at all cofused.

There is a distinct difference between prophetic dreams or visions, and prophetic explicit statements of coming events.

In the entire Bible, there is not a single prophetic dream or vision for which we have an inspired interpretation, in which the meaning was not entirely different from what was seen in the dream or vision. In short, prophetic dreams and visions are not videos, as it were, of coming events, but visual symbols of coming events. In all the dreams or visions for which we have inspired interpretations, the meaning was somethnig that had some kind of a moral similarity to the thing being portrayed, as in a kingdom being represented by a vicious beast.

But the explicit statements of coming events in Biblical prophecies are distinctly different. Wherever these occurred, those which have actually been fulfilled have been fulfilled exactly as stated, down to the tiniest detail.

A typical example of this is the first 36 verses of Daniel 11. From the beginning to the end of this passage, every act attributed to "the king of the south" was actually committed by one of the Ptolomies, a dynasty that ruled out of Alexandria in Egypt. And every act attributed to "the king of the north" was actually committed by one of the Selucids, a dynasty that ruled out of Antioch in Syria. The details of this prophecy were fulfilled so precisely that unbelievers claim that its very accuracy proves that this passage could not have been written before these events actually took place. But scripture distinctly states that they were all prophesied long before any of them happened.

There are many other such examples, such as being explicitly told that Messiah would be born of a virgin, that He would be born in Bethlehem, that he would be called out of Egypt, and even when he would come. All of these took place exactly as had been stated long before they happened.

But Preterist and Historicists take many other prophecies which are similarly stated in explicit words, and claim they have been fulfilled in events for which less than 20% of the details contained in the prophecy actually correspond to details of the historical records which allegedly tell of their fulfillment. This is completely different from the fulfilments of these other prophecies.

Now as the Revelation is an apocalypse, that is, a vision, the things seen are not to be thought of as actual pictures of coming events. I agree that these are symbols of coming events, not actual coming events. But even in the report of this series of visions, there are interspersed explicit statements of things to come. To say that these things will not actually happen is to deny what our God has stated.

Now the scriptures speak in many places of an end time return of all Israel to their ancient homeland. Many want to interpret the "Israel" in all these prophecies to mean "the church," and to interpret "the land" to mean "heaven." The problem with all this is that these interpretations simply break down when we begin to inspect the details of what the prophecy states. In order to pretend that these prophecies mean the church being taken to heaven, you have to simply ignore almost all of the details in these prophecies. For these prophecies contain many details which simply do not work in such interpretations. So these details are simply ignored.

And the same is true of the claims that most of these prophecies have already been fulfilled. In order to pretend that most of them have actually been fulfilled, it is necessary to pretend that most of the details in the prophecy are simply insignificant. But Jesus said the very opposite when He said "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." Matthew 5:17-18

The jot and the tittle were the two smallest marks used to build the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. So here Jesus was saying that not only every word, but even the spelling of every word, was significant and important, and not a single detail would fail to be fulfilled.
 
Upvote 0

Hazelelponi

:sighing:
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
9,357
8,758
55
USA
✟687,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Now the scriptures speak in many places of an end time return of all Israel to their ancient homeland. Many want to interpret the "Israel" in all these prophecies to mean "the church," and to interpret "the land" to mean "heaven." The problem with all this is that these interpretations simply break down when we begin to inspect the details of what the prophecy states. In order to pretend that these prophecies mean the church being taken to heaven, you have to simply ignore almost all of the details in these prophecies. For these prophecies contain many details which simply do not work in such interpretations. So these details are simply ignored.

Why not ask the Word of God, as we see in Acts 2:5-12;

"Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven residing in Jerusalem. When this sound occurred, a crowd gathered and was in confusion, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. Completely baffled, they said, “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that each one of us hears them in our own native language? Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and the province of Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs—we hear them speaking in our own languages about the great deeds God has done!” All were astounded and greatly confused, saying to one another, “What does this mean?”

God has told you the return to Israel already happened. Don't be so quick to discount this event as meaningless. This was carefully recorded for a reason. There were Jews from every country under heaven living/residing in Jerusalem. Yet a study of the place names mentioned is a study of the dispersion...

"by the Medes are intended the Jews that were natives of Media: so called from "Madai", one of the sons of Japhet, Genesis 10:2 and this, according to Ptolomy, has on the north the Hyrcanian, or Gasptan sea, on the west Armenia Major and Assyria, and on the east Hyrcania and Parthia, and on the south Parthia. The Elamites are so called, from Elam the son of Shem, Genesis 10:22 and these, according to Josephus, were the founders of the Persians, or from whom they sprung; and so we find Elam and Media, and the kings of Elam, and the kings of the Medes, mentioned together in Scripture, Isaiah 21:2. And certain it is, that Elam was at least a part of the empire of Persia, in Daniel's time; for Shushan, where the kings of Persia then kept their palace, was in the province of Elam, Daniel 8:2 and it is evident, that hither the Jews were carried captive, Isaiah 11:11. So that there might be some remaining in those parts, that were their descendants"

It's up to you to do the study...

As for them living in Jerusalem, the phrase is used with reasonable frequency (Luke 13:4; Acts 1:19; Acts 4:16) and implied a more settled residence than the "sojourning" of Luke 24:18
 
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

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Why not ask the Word of God, as we see in Acts 2:5-12;

"Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven residing in Jerusalem. When this sound occurred, a crowd gathered and was in confusion, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. Completely baffled, they said, “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that each one of us hears them in our own native language? Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and the province of Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs—we hear them speaking in our own languages about the great deeds God has done!” All were astounded and greatly confused, saying to one another, “What does this mean?”

God has told you the return to Israel already happened. Don't be so quick to discount this event as meaningless. This was carefully recorded for a reason. There were Jews from every country under heaven living/residing in Jerusalem. Yet a study of the place names mentioned is a study of the dispersion...

"by the Medes are intended the Jews that were natives of Media: so called from "Madai", one of the sons of Japhet, Genesis 10:2 and this, according to Ptolomy, has on the north the Hyrcanian, or Gasptan sea, on the west Armenia Major and Assyria, and on the east Hyrcania and Parthia, and on the south Parthia. The Elamites are so called, from Elam the son of Shem, Genesis 10:22 and these, according to Josephus, were the founders of the Persians, or from whom they sprung; and so we find Elam and Media, and the kings of Elam, and the kings of the Medes, mentioned together in Scripture, Isaiah 21:2. And certain it is, that Elam was at least a part of the empire of Persia, in Daniel's time; for Shushan, where the kings of Persia then kept their palace, was in the province of Elam, Daniel 8:2 and it is evident, that hither the Jews were carried captive, Isaiah 11:11. So that there might be some remaining in those parts, that were their descendants"

It's up to you to do the study...

As for them living in Jerusalem, the phrase is used with reasonable frequency (Luke 13:4; Acts 1:19; Acts 4:16) and implied a more settled residence than the "sojourning" of Luke 24:18

There is no way to even pretend that Ezekiel 20:33-38, Ezekiel 36:1-10, Ezekiel 47:15-20, or any part of Ezekiel 48 has ever been fulfilled.
 
Upvote 0

Hazelelponi

:sighing:
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
9,357
8,758
55
USA
✟687,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
There is no way to even pretend that Ezekiel 20:33-38, Ezekiel 36:1-10, Ezekiel 47:15-20, or any part of Ezekiel 48 has ever been fulfilled.

I don't "pretend" anything.

I've apparently struck a nerve and made you angry so I'm out.
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
I don't "pretend" anything.

I've apparently struck a nerve and made you angry so I'm out.
I am not angry, I am simply pointing out that every one of these scriptures explicitly states coming events that have unquestionably never taken place. And these are but a few of very many. The same is true of Isaiah 4:3, Isaiah 10:28-32, Micah 5:5-6, Zechariah 12:7-9, and Romans 11:26. And the reason for still relying upon all these promises is clearly stated in Romans 11:28-29, "Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable."

"The gifts and calling of God are irrevocable."
It could not be stated more plainly than that.
 
Upvote 0

Hazelelponi

:sighing:
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
9,357
8,758
55
USA
✟687,715.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I am not angry, I am simply pointing out that every one of these scriptures explicitly states coming events that have unquestionably never taken place. And these are but a few of very many. The same is true of Isaiah 4:3, Isaiah 10:28-32, Micah 5:5-6, Zechariah 12:7-9, and Romans 11:26. And the reason for still relying upon all these promises is clearly stated in Romans 11:28-29, "Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable."

"The gifts and calling of God are irrevocable."
It could not be stated more plainly than that.

I don't know everything most certainly, but what I do know comes from scripture and not my idea of what something will or will not look like. I think we should all learn a lesson from the Pharisees on that account and be more open to reading the Bible with a mind that we might not know everything.

Galatians 4:22-31, Hebrews 12:22-25

And there was an entire generation (right at or nearly 40 years depending on dating) between the death of Jesus to the destruction of the Temple.. That gave every single Jew a chance, who was alive during the time of Christ, to repent and come to Christ before the final end of the Mosaic age and the fullness of the Messianic or age of the New Covenant began.

At any rate, I won't sit an argue with you... there's no point to it.

Not every person who called themself a Jew was intended to be saved, and I don't see the Bible demand it - but all of Israel, the Israel of God, was saved and saved prior to the destruction which was a judgement on unbelieving Israel.
 
Last edited:
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

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
I don't know everything most certainly, but what I do know comes from scripture and not my idea of what something will or will not look like. I think we should all learn a lesson from the Pharisees on that account and be more open to reading the Bible with a mind that we might not know everything.

Galatians 4:22-31, Hebrews 12:22-25 and more shows the spiritualization (? on spelling) of Jerusalem, of Zion with the New Covenant. Not everything in either the old or the new testament that speaks of Jerusalem or Zion is speaking of some land...

And there was an entire generation (right at or nearly 40 years depending on dating) between the death of Jesus to the destruction of the Temple.. That gave every single Jew a chance, who was alive during the time of Christ, to repent and come to Christ before the final end of the Mosaic age and the fullness of the Messianic or age of the New Covenant began.

At any rate, I won't sit an argue with you... there's no point to it.

Not every person who called themself a Jew was intended to be saved, and I don't see the Bible demand it - but all of Israel, the Israel of God, was saved.

I am not stating "my idea of what something will or will not look like." I am pointing to scriptures which explicitly state coming events which have unquestionably not happened. It is actually you who is posting your ideas of the way things are." For not even one scripture, anywhere in the entire Bible, ever states that "Israel" symbolizes "the church" this is interpretation of what the scriptures say, not what they say.

And dispensationalism does not teach that "every person who called themself a Jew was intended to be saved." I have never heard even one dispensationalist, no matter how ignorant of the scriptures, say any such thing.

What the scriptures explicitly state, and not just teach in a general way, is that the rebels will be purged from among the people of Israel. (Ezekiel 20:33-38) It will not be until be after this, and only after this, that all Israel will be saved. And it will be only after this that absolutely all of the house of Israel will again inhabit the land, (Ezekiel 36:1-10) and that the land will have the borders so explicitly defined in Ezekiel 47:20-25, and it will be divided among the twelve tribes as so explicitly stated in Ezekiel 48.

All these things are not interpretations, but explicit statements of God, the God who cannot lie, and whose gifts and calling are irrevocable.

You are using interpretations of the meanings of other scriptures as an excuse to deny that these things will actually happen. The explicit statement of a single scripture trumps all interpretations of all other scriptures, no matter how many there are. But in this case, the number of scriptures that explicitly state that Israel will be restored to her land and to her God far exceeds he number of scriptures that are even interpreted to mean otherwise.
 
Upvote 0