• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

“Generation”, Matthew 25, and Deuteronomy 28-30

Discussion in 'Eschatology - Endtimes & Prophecy Forum' started by gospelfer, Mar 29, 2015.

  1. Danoh

    Danoh Newbie

    Bible2, you very often make use of the phrase "this could mean that..."

    If you are using it in the sense of your not being sure of what it is you are asserting when you use that phrase, I strongly suggest you watch the video I posted above, that you begin to move away from so often an uncertainty on your part.

    You owe your obviously insatiable curiosity at least that much anyway.

    I sincerely doubt you'll find holes to punch in that video's assertion.

    Yes, this is my attempt to persuade you to at least hear out its take on Matt. 24's "this generation."

    Likewise as to other posters on here; the brother on that video left no hole in his argument...
  2. Brian45

    Brian45 Senior Member

    I'm not a preterist I'm a futurist so sorry if you got the wrong idea...:)
  3. Danoh

    Danoh Newbie

    Likewise; was not posting that video in response to you; was merely posting it :)
  4. Straightshot

    Straightshot Member

    The generation that the Lord speaks of is the post flood generation with the re-population of humanity extending from that judgment to the next judgment .... which is still pending [Matthew 24:36-39]
  5. ebedmelech

    ebedmelech My dog Micah in the pic Supporter

    On this I'll move on Bible2! Especially when you try to say what was in Jesus mind.

    You'll find that out!
  6. gospelfer

    gospelfer Newbie

    Some people have made objections to individual assertions about the contents of Matt 24; in many cases an attempt is made to minimize the force of Christ's words. So, for instance, Christ says

    "And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. "

    The meaning of this is then minimized to align with Paul's utterances which say, in effect, "the Gospel is being preached to whole world". It's not literally true, of course, but it is true in the sense the Gospel is being preached everywhere Christians go, and the scope of this area is expanding quickly. Because prophetic utterances are sometimes exaggerated is impossible to disprove this assertion. However, we can see that Christ's is certainly more pointed (the whole world), and Paul's very possibly colloquial to his circumstance.

    Another example of diminishment is the "falling away" which is assigned to the fact that some believers leave the early church. Well, some believers are always leaving any movement, and if this is all Christ means, it means nothing at all. But he speaks as if it is something prophetic and noticeable on a historical scale. Whatever departures existed in the first century are not noticeable historically; instead, what we actually notice is an exponentially exploding Gopel. The only way to make Christ's words fit the first century is to diminish his meaning to the point where it is true of all movements at all times -- and fails to be prophetic or possible to notice as a sign of the times.

    Some things are also spiritualized: so, for instance, the tribulation is taken to be a spiritual dismissal of Israel, thereby supposedly earning it assignment to the words:
    "For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short."

    The reason this has to be spiritualized, of course is because it is so far from being anywhere near true as a historical fact. There are things in latter day prophecy which fit Christ's words (the latter day judgements in the prophets and Revelation), but prophecy categorically states these all involve many nations.

    And beyond this, there are, of course, matters such as the abomination of desolation (stated as a future event, not past) which don't fit at all.

    Thus, the overall problem is that even though a couple matters can be minimized without too much dissonance, others are too great. And the fact that we have to relentless minimize everything (even matters which don't bear it well) should inform us something is wrong.

    Additionally, there exist established prophetic themes impossible to fit into the 1st century, repeated again and again in the prophets, and these fit Christ's words better than our relentlessly minimized version of his predictions. Which is to say, there exist future prophetic events to which Christ's words agree rather nicely, but which we are refusing because they lie outside the 1st century.

    Finally, no critic has dealt with Moses' threefold structure of history (the central anchor my post). It has been entirely ignored. Moses presents a history containing a period of "blessing", followed by "curse" (subjection, then long suffering, homeless exile), and finally a subsequent "return". Moses states that these epochs (or "generations") are certain to happen. And this idea of the Jew's eventual return is everywhere in prophecy -- it is a major theme. As far as I can tell the preterist simply pretends it is not there -- despite the fact Paul issues a rather stern warning on this matter.

    I seriously urge our preterist brothers to listen to anti-missionary rabbis speak on things like Isaiah 52, 42, and Daniel 9. You will see your own methods at work. They relentlessly minimize meaning; and, in fact, taken individually, none of their minimzing assertions (or "re-assigments") can be disproved -- it's quite shocking. Their error lies in the sum of the effort required bend the whole passage away from its actual meaning; but if one gets lost in the weeds of the individual points for a while, one starts to lose sight of the whole passage; their argument starts to sound quite reasonable. Beyond this, there are larger themes in prophecy which the rabbi is unable to address, and which fit with the true meaning of these passage -- but it is unlikely most people (at least Jews) will realize this.

    I myself am a Jew; I became a Christian because I read prophecy. What I saw (Isaiah, Dan, etc) disturbed me. The first place I went was to our rabbis. Their "explanations" were inadequate; the preterist explanations of Matt 24 have precisely same errors as the explanations of the rabbis; individually some preterist minimizing explanations are sort of believable, in sum they are not (and of course a few things don't fit at all), and the overall preterist picture fails dismally to harmonize with the rest of the prophetic story (Moses' threefold prophecy, etc, etc). Given the fact that there is perfectly workable alternate to the preterist position (Moses' historical structure) which matches what Christ says without having to minimize nearly all his predictions, and which also harmonizes with the rest of prophecy, I will choose that. The preterist position requires too much mental gymnastics, and it requires discarding what Moses (and many prophets) says is sure to come. It invalidates prophecy. It is a poison pill. Again, why create problems for ourselves when there is an already-existing, perfectly rational prophetic structure which requires no mental gymnastics?
  7. Bible2

    Bible2 Guest

    That's right.

    Also, regarding the parallel verses to Matthew 24:21-22:

    "... in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be. And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days" (Mark 13:19-20),

    Mark 13:20 can mean that all flesh on the earth would die if the Lord hadn't already shortened, as in "he hath shortened" (Mark 13:20b), the number of days of the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18, Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. The Lord could have already determined, from the beginning of Creation (cf. Isaiah 46:10), that he will return on the 1,335th day after the abomination of desolation (possibly a standing, android image of the Antichrist) is set up in the holy place (the inner sanctum) of a 3rd Jewish temple in Jerusalem (Matthew 24:15, Daniel 12:11-12, Revelation 16:15). And the Lord will return "immediately after the tribulation" (Matthew 24:29-31), immediately after its final event, the worldwide destruction during the 7th vial (Revelation 16:19, Revelation 19:2 to 20:6). So Mark 13:20 can mean that if the Lord hadn't shortened the number of days of the tribulation, then all flesh on the earth would die during the 7th vial's aftermath, which could be a nuclear-winter scenario (which the Lord will miraculously prevent at his return) brought on by the 10 kings of the Antichrist's empire nuking the cities of the nations at the 7th vial (Revelation 17:16-17a, Revelation 16:19).
  8. parousia70

    parousia70 I'm livin' in yesterday's tomorrow Supporter

    United States
    But Paul is just as pointed: "Every Creature under heaven", "the whole world" "All Nations". etc... Paul's Scope IS Christ's Scope.
    They are both speaking of the same thing, the only difference is tense, Christ speaks of it in Future tense, Paul in past tense.


    Which Continues to explode exponentially today....It's not in retreat as you would have us believe my friend. There are more people reached by the gospel today than there were yesterday, and there will be more tomorrow...

    But it's not "everywhere in Prophesy".
    All the prophecies about the dispersion and return of the Jews to their own land were fulfilled at the end the Babylonian Captivity in 457 B.C.,— not 1948 when the State of Israel was formed.

    "In all your dwelling places the cities shall be laid waste, and the high places desolate . . . ye shall be scattered among the countries . . . among the nations whither they shall be carried captives . . . all the house of Israel shall remove and go into captivity . . . I will scatter them among the nations" (Ezekiel ch. 6–12).

    This was the Diaspora. . . . And now the re-gathering of the Jews to their own land 70 years later:

    "For thus saith the Lord, that after 70 years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you . . . and I will turn away your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations . . . and I will bring you again into the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive" (Jeremiah. 29: 10-14).

    Not one single verse in the Old Testament, or New, written after the Babylonian Captivity, mentions any other dispersion and re-gathering of the Jews. Not even ONE.

    The Bible says they WOULD be dispersed into all nations,
    The Bible then confirms they DID get dispersed into all nations.
    The Bible says they would be gathered back FROM all nations.
    The Bible then confirms they WERE gathered back from All nations.

    Prophetic fulfillment has been realized. No further fulfillment of this prophesy is necessary or biblically warranted.
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2015
  9. gospelfer

    gospelfer Newbie

    Paul may be as pointed as Christ (though the Greek doesn't quite support that), but what Paul said clearly wasn't any where near true in a literal sense. You have no grounds for the supposition that Christ meant his words in the same sense as Paul. He may have, or he may not have. Prophecy gives grounds for an eventual actual spread of the Gospel to entire world (in a literal sense). Thus this is an instance of minimization. If everything else amongst Christs words fit into the 1st century, I would accept this minimization; but it doesn't so I don't. It's about what fits prophecy best. Preterism doesn't. It can only be matched against a small subset of prophecy -- and only by nearly constant application of pressure to the text.

    Also, you fail to address Moses' three-age vision of Israel's history. I don't really blame your for this because no preterist addresses it. In fact, it cannot be addressed from the preterist postion: Moses' three-part history forbids the preterist position.
  10. Danoh

    Danoh Newbie

    Yep, never mind what the WHOLE of their promised regathering is about, nor what said WHOLE entails, nor that Israel remained under Gentile dominion even after those of that nation who were regathered were regathered.

    The WHOLE of the following was NEVER fulfiled- Jeremiah 32:

    36 And now therefore thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, concerning this city, whereof ye say, It shall be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon by the sword, and by the famine, and by the pestilence;

    37 Behold, I will gather them out of all countries, whither I have driven them in mine anger, and in my fury, and in great wrath; and I will bring them again unto this place, and I will cause them to dwell safely:

    38 And they shall be my people, and I will be their God:

    39 And I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them:

    40 And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.

    41 Yea, I will rejoice over them to do them good, and I will plant them in this land assuredly with my whole heart and with my whole soul.

    42 For thus saith the Lord; Like as I have brought all this great evil upon this people, so will I bring upon them all the good that I have promised them.

    43 And fields shall be bought in this land, whereof ye say, It is desolate without man or beast; it is given into the hand of the Chaldeans.

    44 Men shall buy fields for money, and subscribe evidences, and seal them, and take witnesses in the land of Benjamin, and in the places about Jerusalem, and in the cities of Judah, and in the cities of the mountains, and in the cities of the valley, and in the cities of the south: for I will cause their captivity to return, saith the Lord.

    John 11:

    49 And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all,

    50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.

    51 And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;

    52 And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.

    John 19:

    10 Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?

    11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.

    Israel has YET to have experienced this that the Apostle Paul refers to in Romans 11 as "THEIR FULNESS " - this YET FUTURE regathering back unto their land to dwell safely under His rule.

    In fact, the 70AD argument actually PROVES THAT to be the case! For, rather than the above, Israel was once more "scattered abroad" in DISOBEDIENCE.

    Even 1948 was not the above promised regathering. For the above foretells them being regathered in OBEDIENCE.

    " FOR I would NOT that ye should be ignorant, brethren..."
  11. BABerean2

    BABerean2 Newbie Supporter

    Both Full Futurism and Full Preterism are wrong because they ignore one of the two questions asked by the disciples and answered by Christ in Matthew chapter 24.

    At the beginning of Matthew’s account of the Olivet Discourse, four of His disciples ask Jesus 2 questions.

    Mat 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

    Mat 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

    1st Question: When shall these things be?

    Christ has just told them the temple would be destroyed in the previous verse.
    Therefore this question is asking about when the temple would be destroyed.

    2nd Question: What shall be the sign of thy coming (Gk. “parousia”), and the end of the age?

    The Greek word “parousia” is used throughout the New Testament to describe His Second Coming.

    Those who hold to a futurist interpretation of scripture often times ignore the first question. They seem to believe that Christ did not answer the first question.
    However, is this a correct interpretation of the text?

    Can we prove from the New Testament and historical writings that Jesus did answer the first question within the first half of Matthew, chapter 24?

    Mat 24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

    Act 8:9 But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one: (Simon Magus was a deceiver as confirmed here and also by Jerome.)

    Mat 24:6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

    During 66 AD the Roman 12th Legion under the command of Cestius Gallus surrounded the city of Jerusalem. For some unknown reason, he ordered his army to stop the seige. During the retreat the Romans were attacked by the Jews who killed about 6,000 of the Roman soldiers.………………………

    Mat 24:7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

    There was a devastating earthquake around 60-62 AD that destroyed much of Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis. This was recorded by Tacitus in his writings as being during the 7th year of Nero.
    Mat 24:8 All these are the beginning of sorrows.
    Mat 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

    The New Testament records the persecution of the early Christians, mainly by the Jews.
    This is described specifically in Mark’s Gospel.

    Mar 13:9 But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.

    The Apostle Paul confirms that he fulfilled this persecution.

    Act 22:19 And I said, Lord, they know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on thee:

    Act 22:20 And when the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting unto his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew him.

    Mat 24:10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
    Mat 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
    Mat 24:12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

    Fulfilled below in the New Testament.

    Col_4:14 Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you.
    2Ti_4:10 For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia.
    1Jn_4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.


    Mat 24:13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

    Mat 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

    Was the Gospel preached into every nation in the modern world? No.
    However, according to Paul it was preached into every nation of his known world.

    Col 1:5 For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel;
    Col 1:6 Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth:

    Col 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;


    Mat 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)
    Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

    Mat 24:17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
    Mat 24:18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
    Mat 24:19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
    Mat 24:20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

    We know sometime before the final siege of 70 AD the early Christians left the city of Jerusalem.

    A parallel study of the three Gospel accounts reveals the Abomination of Desolation.

    During the time of Christ the Jews celebrated Hanukka. He was well aware of the first occurrence of the Abomination of Desolation in the temple, when Antiochus Epiphanes set up a statue of Zeus (He had previously claimed he was Zeus) in the temple and had a pig slaughtered on the altar, during 167 BC.
    Hanukkah celebrates the cleansing and rededication of the temple which occurred three years after the abomination of desolation by Antiochus in 167 BC.
    Therefore, Christ was predicting a second occurrence of the Abomination of Desolation in the Olivet Discourse.
    Several events could be a possible desecration of the temple during 70 AD. The Roman standards were posted at the temple site. Sacrifices were made to Titus at the temple site. Also, the behavior of the zealots within the temple itself during the siege is regarded by many as a desecration of the temple.

    Mat 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)
    Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

    Mar 13:14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

    Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh(near).
    Luk 21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

    Luke’s account above clearly states that the desolation would be near the time that Jerusalem was surrounded by armies.
    We know the early Christians did flee from Jerusalem.

    While He was being taken to the Cross, Jesus warned the women who were weeping for him about what was to come. During this warning He makes a reference similar to that found in Matthew 24:19, about nursing mothers. This warning is also specifically made to these women and their children.
    During the siege of 70 AD some women ate their own children, due to the lack of food during the siege.

    Luk 23:28 But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children.

    Luk 23:29 For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck.

    Almost all scholars agree that the following verse is a specific reference to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

    Luk 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

    Jesus answered the first question asked by four of His disciples, at the beginning of Matthew chapter 24?

    When shall these things be?

    Full-Futurism and Full-Preterism are both wrong.

    The disciples asked Jesus two questions and He answered two questions in the Olivet Discourse.
  12. Danoh

    Danoh Newbie

    Try addressing the issue the speaker on that video as addressing - the issue of subjunctive mood.

    All you did was repeat your same old fusion of passages that do not go together, further fusing them with external sources you think relate your understandings.
  13. Straightshot

    Straightshot Member

    My comment

    "This generation" that the Lord refers to is still ongoing from the flood forward .... and the ending date cannot be determined and is not revealed in scripture

    The time lapse of the same is defined from judgment to judgment .... from the flood to the next one, but the length of the time lapse cannot be calculated [Matthew 24:36-39]
  14. gospelfer

    gospelfer Newbie


    I did watch the video, and the whole subjunctive mood was a surprise. I looked at the Greek, and it is indeed in the subjunctive -- which is funny because none of the English translations I've seen have managed to capture that fact. Personally, I think the argument from Deut 29-30 is stronger, but both are individiually strong enough to cut the legs out from under the preterist position; and they both accomplish it by showing that the preterist insistance that Christ's words demand that the end of the age (or curse) must be over by 70 AD is false. The preterist is merely one of three possible interpretations; it is the worst of these choices because it requires throwing a great deal of prophecy.

    I have yet to see any preterist here address this problem -- that is, why should anyone accept the preterist position when there are two other ones which don't require that we discard other parts of prophecy?
  15. parousia70

    parousia70 I'm livin' in yesterday's tomorrow Supporter

    United States
    They do require we discard the God Given time frame for their fulfillment however.

    Shortly must be discarded and replaced with long time.

    Near must be discarded and replaced with Far

    About to take place must be discarded and replaced with thousands of years away

    In a very, very little while must be discarded and replaced with in a very, very long time

    Will not delay must be discarded and replaced with will be delayed

    When you see must be discarded and replaced with when someone else 2000 years from now sees

    I will come as a thief to you must be discarded and replaced with I will come as a thief to someone else thousands of years after you are dead

    etc, etc, etc.....

    Don't kid yourself. Futurism has a cornucopia of it's own "must ignore certain scriptures" challenges...
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2015
  16. Interplanner

    Interplanner Newbie

    The reason that generation was so critical is because it saw Christ and had him explained afterward by the Holy Spirit's use of 2500 or so OT Scriptures. So that generation of Israel should have believed and become the missionaries that Acts 13:47 envisioned.
  17. gospelfer

    gospelfer Newbie


    The problem here is that God's sense of soon appears to be different from our own sense of soon. There is ample evidence that God's "soon" can be many hundreds of years:

    Isaiah 56:
    Thus says the LORD:
    “Keep justice, and do righteousness,
    for soon my salvation will come,
    and my righteousness be revealed.

    Deut 4:
    I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that you will soon utterly perish from the land that you are going over the Jordan to possess. You will not live long in it, but will be utterly destroyed.

    etc ...

    So, the "soonness" of the end of the age can be accomadated to God's timeline. But what are we to do with this -- did it happen in the 1st century? (Zec 12)

    2 “Behold, I am about to make Jerusalem a cup of staggering to all the surrounding peoples. The siege of Jerusalem will also be against Judah. 3 On that day I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all the peoples. All who lift it will surely hurt themselves. And all the nations of the earth will gather against it. 4 On that day, declares the LORD, I will strike every horse with panic, and its rider with madness. But for the sake of the house of Judah I will keep my eyes open, when I strike every horse of the peoples with blindness. 5 Then the clans of Judah shall say to themselves, ‘The inhabitants of Jerusalem have strength through the LORD of hosts, their God.’
    6 “On that day I will make the clans of Judah like a blazing pot in the midst of wood, like a flaming torch among sheaves. And they shall devour to the right and to the left all the surrounding peoples, while Jerusalem shall again be inhabited in its place, in Jerusalem.
    7 “And the LORD will give salvation to the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem may not surpass that of Judah. 8 On that day the LORD will protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the feeblest among them on that day shall be like David, and the house of David shall be like God, like the angel of the LORD, going before them. 9 And on that day I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
    10 “And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn. 11 On that day the mourning in Jerusalem will be as great as the mourning for Hadad-rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. 12 The land shall mourn, each family by itself: the family of the house of David by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself, and their wives by themselves; 13 the family of the house of Levi by itself, and their wives by themselves; the family of the Shimeites by itself, and their wives by themselves; 14 and all the families that are left, each by itself, and their wives by themselves.

    This is the Jew's return, as foretold by Moses in Deut 30 (and Deut 4); if this happened in the 1st century, both the NT authors and history books totally missed it.

    As you can see, the problems with the preterist position are fatal, whereas the futurist's problems are not. The "soonness" of the end of the age is easily dealt with because we can see that God's "soon" is sometimes very, very long from our perspective. But the preterist position simply can't deal with something like Zechariah 12 (or Moses threefold history) -- it simply has to be discarded (or ignored). And that is the problem in a nutshell.

    Thus, I have shown how "soon" can harmonize with the futurist position -- and I do this from scripture. Can you please tell me how Moses' threefold divison of ages (the Jew's blessing, curse, and return), and Zech 12 harmonize with the preterist position?
  18. KrAZeD

    KrAZeD Newbie

    truthfully I describe it as a glass half empty or full dilemma.

    Futurist mindset seems to look at the aspects of prophecies/events not appearing fulfilled or questionable as to their fulfillment leaving one to have to see that something did not add up right since
    all prophecy comes to pass 100% leaving no doubts.

    They go with the aspect of presuming that while specifics were asked, were those exact questions answered to their mindset, many times when Jesus was asked a question He responded with a question to see where their heart of the questioner was and then proceeded to answer (obviously He already knew, but proceeded to ask anyways). Did our Lord tell them of the 70 events or did he tell them more of the prophecy regarding his final return? The point is what was our Lord answering and addressing, understanding He knew the future and exactly what to say for our teaching and understanding.

    For if it were only 70ad those huge stones that stand today are conflicting with what scripture clearly says.

    I do agree it's perplexing as to usages of increments of time we typically understand as in proximity of our mortal scope, though I see it for the greater good to word it as such. Though throughout the bible those exact time frame issues show their head up when God is ready for them, and oddly enough typically not as quick as one would mortally expect.
  19. parousia70

    parousia70 I'm livin' in yesterday's tomorrow Supporter

    United States

    So you are saying when the Bible says something is going to happen "soon" or "near", then that proclamation is essentially meaningless? That we can just discard those passages?

    What then do you do with this?:

    Matt 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

    Is this passage meant to be understood by how time relates to Man or by how time relates to God?
  20. gospelfer

    gospelfer Newbie

    The problem with this whole disagreement is that it casts doubt on scripture. If prophecy cannot be resolved rationally we have a serious problem on our hands. We need a vision of prophecy that rationally harmonizes everything in scripture, and it mustn't be "bendy". It must be honest and forthright.

    The problem is that the preterist position is "bendy", and cannot subsume elements in prophecy to its vision. The opposite is not true: all the preterist objections to futurism can be rationally answered from scripture itself. The "sooness" of the end of the age is a perfectly good example.

    The central point of this thread was Moses vision, a vision entirely anti-thetical to the preterist postion. A preterist has yet to address it. The reason for this is simple: Moses tells a simple 3 part story of Israel's future history: blessing, curse, and return. It is the only fully linear account of Israel's history, and the preterist position is that the story ends in the middle of Moses' account (Israel's destruction, and exile). Moses, ignoring the preterist theory, goes on with his story to tell of Israel's return from the curse. Because this is a simple linnear 3-part story, it cannot be bent, and it cannot be taken out of context. Therefore, the preterest simply cannot address it -- and does not.

    Moses story gives us an apt place to hang much of later prophecy (such as Zech 12), while the preterist position makes much latter day prophecy unbelievable. Again, the problem is harmonization. Futurism harmonizes with scripture and history much, much better than preterism. Preterism requires that we re-write the bible to exclude Deut 29-30 (and 4).