Preterism-phony as a Ford Corvette

3 Resurrections said:

The literal thousand years was history at the time John was writing. As you remember, John was told to "write the things which thou HAST seen", (which would have included the ending of the millennium in AD 33) as well as the things that ARE presently taking place as John was writing, and the things which were ABOUT TO TAKE PLACE after those things.

Click to expand...

Come on. The thousand years was absolutely not history at the time John was writing. That is utter nonsense. The thousand years clearly refers to a time period during which Christ reigns. He clearly began to reign after His resurrection at which point He said this:

Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

You may think I am being "far too literal" as to when I understand an "AT HAND" prophecy to be fulfilled, but not by God's own definition of how HE defines an "at hand" prophecy in Ezekiel 12:21-28. He was very precise in explaining how "at hand" prophecies were to be interpreted. I'm just trying to follow His dictionary.

Click to expand...

That passage isn't referring to all prophecy. You're taking it out of context.

No, not at all. "AT HAND" means the prophecy will not only be spoken by God, but in the same time frame, it will also be "performed in your days", to the ones receiving that prophecy originally. "AT HAND" prophecies are NOT "prolonged" into "times that are far off". For you to say this means "continually approaching" is to evade God's time limits that He gives you.

Click to expand...

Nonsense. Christ has not yet returned, the resurrection of the dead has not yet occurred, the judgment has not yet taken places and the new heavens and new earth have not yet been ushered in. Those things prove that your understanding of "at hand" is false.

If Christ said in Luke 21:36 that He included His second coming return among "...ALL these things that are about to come to pass", why would you want to contradict that?

Click to expand...

The words "about to" there are translated as "shall" in the KJV and are translated from the Greek word mellō (Strong's G3195). That word does not have to refer to something that was about to or was soon to occur. It is used in this verse:

Matthew 11:13 For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. 14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was (Greek: mellō) to come.

I believe this prophecy from Malachi 4:5-6 was written about 400 year prior to Jesus saying that John the Baptist was the Elijah who was to come. Obviously, he was to come for a good amount of time before he actually arrived.

And the stipulated conditions in the New Heavens and New Earth are not quite the sinless utopia you envision, since Isaiah 65:17-25 includes some very particular things that could not possibly be present in the afterlife for believers. Namely, the birth of children, the presence of sinners, death still occurring for them, praying to God, which would not be necessary if we were face to face with Him, etc....

Click to expand...

You are not recognizing that Isaiah was writing to people who did not yet have any concept of eternity like we do now, so he spoke of eternity in a way that they could understand such as the reference to a 100 year old child, which is clearly figurative language.

Why would you interpret Isaiah 65:17-25 in such a way that contradicts Revelation 21:1-4 which clearly says that there will be no more death, sorrow, crying or pain in the new heavens and new earth? The New Testament gives light and clarification to the Old Testament, not the other way around.

3 Resurrections said:

Yes, I'm well aware of that. Some people even take that parenthetical statement out completely, considering it a "variant" reading that should not have been included. Actually, it doesn't change the meaning of the text, with or without it.

Click to expand...

Yes, it absolutely does. You are thinking that the first resurrection refers to "the rest of the dead", right? That's what you were indicating before. But, it doesn't. Understanding that it's just a parenthetical statement is what shows that the first resurrection is not referring to "the rest of the dead" but rather is referring to those mentioned in verse 4 instead.

Spiritual Jew said:

Yes, it absolutely does. You are thinking that the first resurrection refers to "the rest of the dead", right? That's what you were indicating before. But, it doesn't. Understanding that it's just a parenthetical statement is what shows that the first resurrection is not referring to "the rest of the dead" but rather is referring to those mentioned in verse 4 instead

Click to expand...

The "remnant of the dead" in verse 5 is a subset - a portion of the righteous dead mentioned earlier in Revelation 20:4. Only a comparatively small fraction of all the righteous dead were raised on Christ's resurrection day in AD 33. Only 144,000 of those "First-fruits" Matthew 27 resurrected saints.

Yes, we believers all share in the benefits of the First resurrection of Christ, but we did not all participate in it by receiving our resurrected bodies at that single event in time.

Spiritual Jew said:

Come on. The thousand years was absolutely not history at the time John was writing.

Click to expand...

Of course it was over by then . John said so in Revelation 12:12, compared with Revelation 20:3 and 7. Satan was to be loosed for a "little season" when the millennium expired. In John 12:12, John warned the believers that Satan was already loosed in great wrath, knowing he had just a "short time" left. This should tell you that the millennium had already ended, even before John was writing Revelation.

Spiritual Jew said:

Nonsense. Christ has not yet returned, the resurrection of the dead has not yet occurred, the judgment has not yet taken places and the new heavens and new earth have not yet been ushered in. Those things prove that your understanding of "at hand" is false.

Click to expand...

Well, Christ promised that He would return before the disciples had personally finished going over the cities of Israel. Paul when on trial before Felix said he agreed with the Pharisees, who also anticipated a resurrection that was "about to" occur. This made Felix tremble. And if you and I are under the New Covenant, then we are in the New Heavens and the New Earth, complete with children being born, sinners still surrounding us, death for the righteous and the wicked still taking place, planting and harvesting and building houses, and praying to God for what we need. All of which Isaiah 65 included within the NHNE conditions.

3 Resurrections said:

The "remnant of the dead" in verse 5 is a subset - a portion of the righteous dead mentioned earlier in Revelation 20:4.

Click to expand...

No, it is not. Come on. I can't take this seriously. Again, the reference to the rest of the dead being resurrected after the thousand years were over was a parenthetical statement that referred to what would happen to the dead that were not mentioned in verse 4. The rest of the dead are completely contrasted with the dead mentioned in verse 4 and the rest of the dead have nothing whatsoever to do with having part in the first resurrection.

Of course it was over by then . John said so in Revelation 12:12, compared with Revelation 20:3 and 7. Satan was to be loosed for a "little season" when the millennium expired. In John 12:12, John warned the believers that Satan was already loosed in great wrath, knowing he had just a "short time" left. This should tell you that the millennium had already ended, even before John was writing Revelation.

Click to expand...

Again, I can't take this seriously. You are missing the context of all these verses. Revelation 12 is about Satan being cast out of heaven, not being loosed from the bottomless pit.

Also, the "short time" of Revelation 12 should not be confused with the "little season" of Revelation 20. I've actually already explained this to you before, but I don't know if you remember.

Look up the Greek word translated as "short" in Revelation 12 and you'll see that it is different than the Greek word translated as "little" in Revelation 20. The Greek word translated as "short" in Revelation 12 does not have to refer to a literally small number but instead can refer to a relatively (but not literally) small number or to a limited (but not necessarily small) number.

3 Resurrections said:

Did you ever consider that it might be BOTH? A "gathering" of harvested wheat and tares back in AD 70, and yet another harvest "gathering" in our future as well?

In other words, one harvest to close out God's dealings with those who had lived and died on earth from creation to the end of that Old Covenant generation, and one last harvest to close out God's dealings with those who will have lived and died under the New Covenant conditions?

After all, this would exactly match the agricultural pattern of harvests in the land of Israel, which had a wheat harvest around Pentecost, and the largest, most varied harvest of different crops at the end of their agricultural year, celebrated at the Feast of Tabernacles.

Click to expand...

The seeds sown in this parable are done by Jesus Christ Himself, after the Second Coming.

Christ as the Messiah the Prince will be on earth to finish the earthly ministry of the 70th week as Prince. In the First century, Christ finished the Messiah part.

It is the same time, because only at the Second Coming will the angels come to earth. The only act of the angels so far was at the birth. No harvest by the angels in the first century, not even at 70AD. No throne set up in Jerusalem in 70 AD to send out the 144k to sow seed along with Jesus Christ, Himself.

Sowing and reaping is figurative any way. This future harvest is actually taking the soul out of one body, and sending it to eternal life or eternal damnation.

3 Resurrections said:

That "remnant of the dead" coming to life again in Revelation 20:5-6 is bluntly pronounced to be "The First Resurrection". John didn't seem to think that there needed to be much more explanation that that. "This is the first resurrection", he said. Period. I can just see the original readers of Revelation slapping their forehead saying, "Oh yeah, now we get it, John. That makes sense. This "First resurrection" is that group of resurrected folks that came walking into Jerusalem that we saw on the same day that Jesus arose from the dead. We remember that for sure."

That comparatively small "remnant of the dead" in Revelation 20:5 would be the "First-fruits", which were NOT a general resurrection, as you just said. They were composed of "Christ the First-fruits" and the 144,000 "First-fruits" that He raised from the dead on the same day that he arose.

Click to expand...

Firstfruits is one thing. First resurrection is not chronological. First resurrection is physical. First birth, first death, and first resurrection are all physical. Second birth, second death, and no second resurrection are all spiritual of the spirit.

robycop3 said:

If it were fairly brief, there's be many survivors. Jesus implied that when He waid no flesh would survive IF THOSE DAYS WEREN'T CUT SHORT.

What comes next? Jesus said that IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE TRIB, there'd be a great cosmic disturbance & then He'd return.

Click to expand...

That's because the great cosmic disturbance takes place in the spiritual realm by manifesting in the natural world. After all, "for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses.." Like Paul said: "first comes the natural, then comes the spiritual". But many like yourself, believe what the Pharisees believed about a physical resurrection and physical reign. Not happening--it contradicts what Christ and the disciples said.

Timtofly said:

Firstfruits is one thing. First resurrection is not chronological.

Click to expand...

Yes, the First resurrection was most certainly chronological. I Corinthians 15:23 tells us this. "But every man in his own order (tagmati); Christ the Firstfruits, afterward they that are Christ's at his coming."

Do you realize what this word "tagmati" signifies? It is a military type term, representing ordered ranks, one after the other. A consecutive series taking place over time. Something chronological. The word "AFTERWARD" should tell you that these two resurrections under discussion is speaking of two events that are chronological.

As you have said, this "First resurrection" was indeed a physical one. But ALL resurrections of believers culminate in the physical bodies of the saints coming to life again in an incorruptible state. The resurrection process is not entirely completed until the dead physical body is glorified and re-united with the soul and spirit of that believer.

But the "second death" was also a physical death in AD 70 - of the city of Jerusalem, its temple, and the priesthood system they were trying to maintain. The first time Israel's Jerusalem and the priesthood system and the temple had all died was under the Babylonian invasion in 586 BC. The entire book of Lamentations was essentially a funeral dirge, mourning those deaths. God promised to revive them, which He did, starting 70 years later in the post-exilic return under Ezra, Nehemiah, Zerubbabel, and Joshua.

This revived ethnic nation of Israel and their temple died a second time in AD 70 - the "second death", as John called it. In God's eyes, never to be revived again this time.

robycop3 said:

No, the 7th kingdom was the Holy Roman Empire. The 8th will be made up at first mostly of the peoples & nations that were part of the 2 Roman empires, before it adds other nations, either by "anschluss", or by conquest.

Click to expand...

No, robycop3, you are adding to the angels' interpretive words. He did not say the seven were "kingdoms" or empires. He said the seven were "kings". Two different words. You are going off in left field by extending the "king" term unnecessarily.

You are also conveniently ignoring the time relevant term of WHEN that Scarlet Beast would arise with its featured seven kings, and when it would SOON be destroyed, which were both "about to" happen in John's days.

Ed Parenteau said:

Like Paul said: "first comes the natural, then comes the spiritual". But many like yourself, believe what the Pharisees believed about a physical resurrection and physical reign. Not happening--it contradicts what Christ and the disciples said.

Click to expand...

Paul never denied the resurrection of the physical body, which he taught would be altered by the power of the Holy Spirit to an incorruptible condition when it was in a glorified state. He told Felix that he AGREED with the Pharisees' teaching about the resurrection in Acts 24:15. "And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow" (speaking of the Pharisees) "that there is about to be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust."

robycop3 said:

I have shown you that oft-times in Scripture, "king" refers to "kingDOM".

Click to expand...

And you have been wrong every time you have so stated this.

robycop3 said:

I have shown you that oft-times in Scripture, "king" refers to "kingDOM". And I showed you that Rome had many more than 7 kings, both before & after Domitian, who was "king" when the Rev was given.

Click to expand...

There is debate of when Revelation was given. I go with the time of Nero, last of the historic Julio Claudian kings.

Julius Caesar
Augustus Caesar
Tiberius
Caligula
Claudius
Nero

King 7 little horn person (end times)
King 8 the beast (the little horn person killed and back to life)

little horn - leader of the EU.
beast - dictator of the EU.

Douggg said:

There is debate of when Revelation was given. I go with the time of Nero, last of the historic Julio Claudian kings.

Click to expand...

It was written then in the time of Nero, but you can pin down the date even more precisely than that, by going with scripture's own definition of who those "kings of the earth" were (as found in Psalms 2:2-3 and Matthew 17:25). Those "kings of the earth" were high priests of the land of Israel - specifically the group of seven and the eighth high priest / "kings" of the family of Annas, who conspired against Christ. The seventh high priest / "king" is the one that dates Revelation's composition; the one which "had not yet come, but when he cometh he shall continue a short space" (Rev. 17:10).

Ananus was the son of Annas who had "not yet come" into the high priest role, but when he did in AD 63, he would only "continue a short space" of three months before he was deposed from that office. His offense was overstepping the bounds of his authority in orchestrating the death of James the Just, before he got permission to do so from Rome.

This means Revelation had to have been written at least BEFORE AD 63, when the appointment of Ananus as the 7th high priest "king" would happen.

robycop3 said:

No, it doesn't.
The signs are all around. The Jews have a sovereign nation, with Jerusalem as its capital, against all odds prevailing up til WW2. There's been an uptick of earthquakes & volcanoes. Climate change is occurring, not because of man's actions, but from GOD'S. The great falling away is happening, with the acceptance of sexual perversion & fornication almost everywhere, & many church services becoming musical jam sessions & preaching freezing cold. War & rumor of war is increasing. Knowledge & travel are greatly increasing, as are famines & pestilences.

All these things, and others, were prophesied in Scripture, & are LITERALLY coming to pass. There's no rational reason to believe the rest won't occur as God's times for each one arrives. No one in his/her right mind can deny these things are happening!

Click to expand...

The great falling away? where?
https://www1.cbn.com/how-christianity-growing-around-world
As Penn State professor Philip Jenkins writes in The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity, predictions like Huntingtons betray an ignorance of the explosive growth of Christianity outside of the West.

For instance, in 1900, there were approximately 10 million Christians in Africa. By 2000, there were 360 million. By 2025, conservative estimates see that number rising to 633 million. Those same estimates put the number of Christians in Latin America in 2025 at 640 million and in Asia at 460 million.

Ed Parenteau said:

https://www1.cbn.com/how-christianity-growing-around-world
As Penn State professor Philip Jenkins writes in The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity, predictions like Huntingtons betray an ignorance of the explosive growth of Christianity outside of the West.

For instance, in 1900, there were approximately 10 million Christians in Africa. By 2000, there were 360 million. By 2025, conservative estimates see that number rising to 633 million. Those same estimates put the number of Christians in Latin America in 2025 at 640 million and in Asia at 460 million.

Click to expand...

More encouraging evidence that what Christ promised of the continual growth of the leaven of the kingdom of heaven would persist in this world. He spoke truly!