Is the posttrib position correct?

thomas15 said:

That and the fact that there is literally no historical data to back up the preterist theory. It's a real head scratcher.

Click to expand...

Do you believe this passage is fulfilled, or are we still waiting for it to be:

Matthew 21
43 “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. 44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.” 45 Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they understood that He was speaking of them.

If you say fulfilled, tell us WHEN, and please provide the historical Data to back it up.

parousia70 said:

Go ahead and provide the scriptural (or even Historic) record of Mary the Virgin naming her Son Immanuel, as this prophesy LITERALLY says would happen.

Click to expand...

He was called Yeshua.
Etymology. The name Jesus is derived from the Hebrew name Yeshua, which is based on the Semitic root y-š-ʕ (Hebrew: ישע‎), meaning "to deliver; to rescue."

Immanuel means 'God with us', therefore Jesus, is the Deliverer, He as God's Son; came to rescue the House of Israel. Prophecy fulfilled.

keras said:

If things prophesied are events and occurrences that can be literally fulfilled; then they will be.
We have the fulfilled prophesies about the first Advent of Jesus literally fulfilled. Why not those about His second Advent and all the prophesied things to happen before that great Day?
Denying this is very wrong as God does want us to know and be prepared for it.

Click to expand...

The historicist view calls for literal fulfillments of what the symbols represent. Not the symbols becoming reality.

ItIsFinished! said:

Futurists cannot miss something that hasn't come to pass yet.
Apparently historicist need a new "trick".

Click to expand...

They don't recognize it, looking for the symbol instead.

If the preterist are correct then anything the Christians did to advance the kingdom prior to AD70 didn't count because the Jewish Priests were still performing sacrifices until that time. This would also imply that Jehovah deemed the sacrificial system as a means of salvation, which is of course not Biblical.

Jesus, nor any of the NT writers never defined the church as one particular denomination or group under the authority of a particular leader or Bishop, rather it is a body of believers that are trusting in the shed blood of Christ for their redemption. Jesus said you must be born again. He did not say you must be affiliated with a particular church.

Christian theology, in particular Covenant theology, tends to view the Church, however they define it, as a "spiritual juggernaut" because historically we are on the post-cross side of history. While it is true that Christians can enjoy benefits not available to those living before the cross, it also adds a bit of responsibility we Christians are not taking to heart, me included. One only needs to read what Jesus has to say about the Churches in Rev. ch 2 and 3 to get an understanding that we are all flawed sinners in the eyes of the Father.

While the Roman invasion of Jerusalem in AD70 stopped the formal sacrificial system of the Jews, it did not in any way shape or form invalidate the promises that Jehovah made to the line of Abraham. Nor did it (the invasion) or the cross of Christ put a permanent end of the Jewish sacrificial system, which again never saved anyone, same as The Lord's Table in the Church never saved anyone.

All of this is of course offensive to those who hold a high view of the organic church or the historic creeds and even the teachings of some leaders in this present age. No matter though because in the end we shall all be judged as individuals not as members of a church or our particular view of doctrine. Why? Because God reads the hearts and minds of men, not the outward appearances. Having said that, doctrine is important because first the Bible teaches that it is important and second if our doctrine isn't in accordance with the actual words of the (whole) Bible then we are not taking the Bible seriously.

If the Bible taught that the destruction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem by the Roman Army was the sole indication of the Lord's return then the preterists would have something more than their sheer force of will to make their point. However there are many other details to the event that have not taken place yet. Good doctrine should agree with all of the Scriptures, of which Jesus said could not be broken.

keras said:

He was called Yeshua.
Etymology. The name Jesus is derived from the Hebrew name Yeshua, which is based on the Semitic root y-š-ʕ (Hebrew: ישע‎), meaning "to deliver; to rescue."

Immanuel means 'God with us', therefore Jesus, is the Deliverer, He as God's Son; came to rescue the House of Israel. Prophecy fulfilled.

Click to expand...

Which is clearly, a patently NON-Literal interpretation.

Thanks for confirming that.

We will now relegate your insistence that the rest of us interpret prophesy literally with the grain of salt your personal desire to be free and loose with your own "faux-literalism" requires.

Guojing said:

I am a pre trib rapture, so I also don't agree that the church need to go thru the trib. Paul also made it clear that the church is saved from wrath.

Click to expand...

Tribulaton and wrath are entirely different things.
Look up the words "tribulation" and "wrath" in a concordance.

thomas15 said:

If the preterist are correct then anything the Christians did to advance the kingdom prior to AD70 didn't count because the Jewish Priests were still performing sacrifices until that time.

Click to expand...

Ridiculous.
That's like Saying anything Moses and the Hebrews Did in their 40 years in the Wilderness "didn't count" because they hadn't entered the Promised land.

One only needs to read what Jesus has to say about the Churches in Rev. ch 2 and 3 to get an understanding that we are all flawed sinners in the eyes of the Father.

Click to expand...

Doesn't your view assert Jesus lied, or at best misled those 7, first century congregations in Rev 2-3, into believing His coming would befall them in their day?

While the Roman invasion of Jerusalem in AD70 stopped the formal sacrificial system of the Jews, it did not in any way shape or form invalidate the promises that Jehovah made to the line of Abraham.

Click to expand...

And Since the Abrahamic Genome is now Ubiquitous in ALL 7 billion Humans on earth today, then we must all be heirs to those promises, shouldn't we?

If the Bible taught that the destruction of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem by the Roman Army was the sole indication of the Lord's return then the preterists would have something more than their sheer force of will to make their point.

Click to expand...

Was this "coming of the Lord" to Destroy the Wicked Chief Priests and Pharisees Fulfilled in 70AD or not?:

Matthew 21:40-45
40 “Therefore, when the Lord of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?”

41 They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will [g]render to him the fruits in their seasons.”

42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:

‘The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone.
This was the Lord’s doing,
And it is marvelous in our eyes’?

43 “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. 44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.”

45 Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they understood that He was speaking of them.

LittleLambofJesus said:

Tribulaton and wrath are entirely different things.
Look up the words "tribulation" and "wrath" in a concordance.

Click to expand...

Do you subscribe to the mid trib rapture, that the church will be raptured 3.5 years into the tribulation?

Hi

Ken Rank said:

It's a big bible, and the mistake we often make is we only look at the NT. And that's everyone, I am not picking on anybody. The most repeated prophecy, and it is not even close... is not the coming or the return of messiah. It is not the rapture, or the great and terrible day of the Lord.... the thing that is most repeated that has not happened yet is the reunification of the entire or whole House of Israel. Some believe this has happened, but Hosea 1:11 makes it clear, when Judah and Ephraim come back together again, they will appoint a head over them, and there has not been a king over a united Israel since Solomon. Deut. 30:1-6, all of Hosea, Ezekiel 37, and 100 other references I can list. Even in Acts 1:6, where the disciples are asking if then was the time to set up the Kingdom. It wasn't... and the fact that they asked and he left the answer open proves is hadn't happened at that time. Since it certainly hasn't happened in the last 2000 years, then it remains the most repeated prophecy that is left on the table. Now yes, Israel being a nation has prophetic significance, but make no mistake... the people there do not represent all of Israel and it is a secular nation, not a kingdom ruled by messiah. Hosea 1:11 has not been fulfilled.

My point in sharing this is simple Brian... where you said, "The thing is though that God is not so cryptic that a basic idea of what is going to happen and a chronology of events cannot be determined," you kind of made the point I was trying to make. If the most repeated prophecy in the bible is written in plain language and yet (I bet) 1% of Christianity would not have given the correct answer, then there still appears to be things that need to be revealed. So He can be cryptic at times, He can be clear at times... and NONE of us know with 100% certainty that we are correct (if we're being honest... and if not, then too full of pride to know any better )!

Click to expand...

I like your answer to your question as i was a bit perplexed as to was it a single prophecy or a theme. The track you are on we could cut and past hundreds of scriptures that show the gathering of Israel in unbelief into the promised land where they would accept the antichrist and then see their salvation through Jesus at the 2nd coming. this transition from tribulation to millennium had a prolific amount of scripture to support this literal timeline and lines are drawn between Jew and Gentile in many passages. A great many Christian think that Israel is now the church. A pastor named Chuck Smith was teaching through Isaiah 62 and noted that the Jews clearly understood the coming of Messiah meant global peace forever and righteousness from Zion forever. They looked at the passages like Isaiah 53 and psalm 22 as spiritual as how could these passages reconcile.? So too many a Christian will now look at Isaiah 53 and psalm 22 as literal but will spiritualize the passages of Jerusalem being the throne of glory or push back all of these promises to the new ? Jerusalem. The Lord showed the two disciples on the road all the passages regarding how the Christ must suffer and die and be raised again. So to will Jesus be able to show all the passages of what is to come.

Brian Mcnamee said:

Hi

I like your answer to your question as i was a bit perplexed as to was it a single prophecy or a theme. The track you are on we could cut and past hundreds of scriptures that show the gathering of Israel in unbelief into the promised land where they would accept the antichrist and then see their salvation through Jesus at the 2nd coming. this transition from tribulation to millennium had a prolific amount of scripture to support this literal timeline and lines are drawn between Jew and Gentile in many passages. A great many Christian think that Israel is now the church. A pastor named Chuck Smith was teaching through Isaiah 62 and noted that the Jews clearly understood the coming of Messiah meant global peace forever and righteousness from Zion forever. They looked at the passages like Isaiah 53 and psalm 22 as spiritual as how could these passages reconcile.? So too many a Christian will now look at Isaiah 53 and psalm 22 as literal but will spiritualize the passages of Jerusalem being the throne of glory or push back all of these promises to the new ? Jerusalem. The Lord showed the two disciples on the road all the passages regarding how the Christ must suffer and die and be raised again. So to will Jesus be able to show all the passages of what is to come.

Click to expand...

In Ezekiel 37, starting in verse 16, we see that Ezekiel is commanded to take the two sticks and join them together. Right after that, God takes them and makes then one in His hand. I would suggest to you that this is wrongly translated. The word of join when Ezekiel does it, is qarav. That word doesn't mean "to join," rather... qarav means "to draw near." If they draw near, draw close, but are not yet joined... that means that the stick of Judah and the stick of Joseph remain unique (who they are) but do draw close to another. Once THAT happens, then God makes us all one in His hand. So, one of the things we should be looking for is, I believe, Jews and Christians to start drawing closer to one another in mutual respect (not trying to turn one into the other) as that would fulfill Ezekiel 37:16-17 and God making them one in His hand is Messiah returning for His bride, the great gathering... God making us echad, one... in His hand (metaphoric of His power and authority, the beginning of the Millennial Reign.

Blessings.
Ken

Reformed Covenant theologians like very much to say over and over again that the dispies are believing in a system that is only about 2-3 hundred years old. This of course is of no comfort to the preterist because theirs is a system much newer than that. How could it be that our Lord returned 2000 years ago and no one noticed? Why has the organized church been celebrating the Lords Table all this time for no good reason because we are now in the (spiritual) Kingdom of Christ?

The real debate however is not between the dispies and the preterists. The actual debate is between covenant theology and dispensationalism. In the corner of the covenant crowd are the (Evangelical) Reformed, the Roman and the Orthodox churches. All of their disagreements amongst themselves evaporates when it comes to debate with the dispies. The preterist theory lives and dies on covenant theology which has it it's root the thinking and theology of the medieval church. It relies on the creeds and tradition and a here and there a Bible verse.