A Challenge to Futurists

[OldBadfish]

Originally posted by Verizon1

What kind of fools do they, think we are? I have head and the lies and back pedaling on these things that I can stand from the so called futurist. And I will not answer any more of your silly back pedaling. Jesus is a false prophet by his own words (Matthew 16:27-28)

Verizon1 this is your local friendly Administrator, please take it easy with your use of words, this a Christian board.

 

[verizon1]

Originally posted by Manifestation1*AD70


When I was studying the preterist position, a brother in the Lord tried to alter my thinking by saying that the above verses were fulfilled at the Transfiguration.

Lest first start with what this verse do not mean before we build our foundation on what they do mean. The first attempt to avoid Jesus obvious wording of the passage is offered by the amillennialist interpretation. It goes like this verse 27 is speaking about the end of time and verse 28 is speaking about the establishment of the kingdom on Pentecost.

The second attempt to avoid the power of these words is offered by the preillennial. They say Jesus' prediction was fulfilled in the Transfiguration scene just six days later when Peter, James and John saw Jesus glorified with Moses and Elijah. Here is the dilemma with these views.

If the verse are an undivided unit the amillennialist view is wrong because verse 27 speaks of Jesus coming in Judgment with his angels and that did not happen on Pentecost! And on the other hand, the premillennial doctrine is false since because Jesus did not reward each according to his works at the Transfiguration.

In fact,you are right, Jesus did promise to return in judgment of all men in his generation. Peter tells us Jesus was "ready to judge the living and the dead." 1 Peter 4:5 Peter warned them to be saved from that generation (Acts 2:32-40).
.

Manifestation you have given alot of scripture here. While I go over these things in the Bible can another preterist work on answering a question for me. I am also e-mailing your answers over seas (back home) if you don't mind.

My question is what is your interpretation of Matt. 24:29 How can you say that the sun was darkened, and the stars fell from the sky. This also has not happen which makes the Bible false.

 

[Mike Beidler]

Originally posted by verizon1


Manifestation you have given alot of scripture here. While I go over these things in the Bible can another preterist work on answering a question for me. I am also e-mailing your answers over seas (back home) if you don't mind.

My question is what is your interpretation of Matt. 24:29 How can you say that the sun was darkened, and the stars fell from the sky. This also has not happen which makes the Bible false.

In short, the "signs in the sky" are not to be taken literally. The cultures of that period understood the language to be metaphoric; indeed, a close comparison of Middle Eastern apocalyptic literature and Scripture will show that the sun being darkened, the moon turning to blood, and the stars falling from the sky actually represented the downfall of a particular nation or religious system. These doomed nations did not expect to see these things, but they certainly knew that the words contained descriptions of divine judgment.

One thing that I fell prey to in my 30 years as a futurist was not reading the Bible in the cultural contexts that it was written; instead, I imposed my 21st-century view upon the Scriptures and tried to glean meaning from it that wasn't there or wasn't intended byt the Author. We can't forget to read the Bible from the point-of-view of the audience for which a particular book was written. And we also can't separate the culture of the New Testament from the culture of the Old Testament. They were the SAME culture and we should expect the readers of the New Testament to interpret the language of the Apostles and Jesus in the same manner as they interpreted the language of the prophets of old.

So did these things actually happen? Literally and physically, no. Literally and spiritually, yes. The cosmos did not disappear, but the literal nations under judgment certainly did.

If you are Muslim like some people are claiming, I'm sure you can answer this question for me: are there any passages in the Quran that use poetic and/or apocalyptic language reserved for judgment of people or nations? I'd be interested to know if there are literary parallels between the Quran and the Bible.

 

[verizon1]

Originally posted by Badfish
Originally posted by Verizon1


Verizon1 this is your local friendly Administrator, please take it easy with your use of words, this a Christian board.

I was NOT calling futurist christians fools. I said that they believe WE are the fools when they tell us scripture says something that it does not. We also know the Greek and Hebrew better then most christians. I will take it easy however.

 

[OldBadfish]

Originally posted by verizon1


I was NOT calling futurist christians fools. I said that they believe WE are the fools when they tell us scripture says something that it does not. We also know the Greek and Hebrew better then most christians. I will take it easy however.

Cool, thanks

 

[Ozarkpreterist]

Originally posted by npetreley


How do I answer these charges?

First of all, I've never been called upon to answer them. The topic never comes up. I think that's a shame, because I study prophecy and I like to discuss it. But most people I know don't care about prophecy.

But if I had to answer, I'd answer from scripture: 2 Peter 3

What I would NOT do is reinterpret scripture to mean Jesus had already returned just to squelch attacks. Why would I do that? If we're not being attacked, we're probably not telling the truth.

It is a dangerous thing to take one scripture and build a whole method of interpretation around it. futurists commonly use this passage to say that the time statements of the Jesus and the apostles cannot be taken at face value. A thousand years is as a day and a day as a thousand years to God. Therefore, soon doesn't necessarily mean soon and quickly doesn't mean quickly in the scriptures.

However, if we use this passage to interpret other prophesies, we run into obvious problems. The scriptures foretold that Jesus would rise from the dead three days after His crucifixion. According to the futurists use of II Peter 3:8-9 this could mean that He rises from the dead three thousand years later!

To even begin to prove that II Peter 3:8-9 can be used to negate the obvious time statements of the New Testament one would at least have to find some precedent for doing so. In other words, futurists would have to find at least one place in the Bible where God said He was going to do something quickly or soon and then waited a millennium or two to do it. Can any futurists find such a passage?

To give you an idea how preterists use the precedents of scripture, consider the story of Simeon in Luke 2:25-32. The Lord promised this man that he would live to see the Messiah with his own eyes. The Lord kept His promise. He did not fulfill it with someone else in some future generation. Yet, futurists say Jesus did not really mean it when He said to certain people face to face that they would see Him come in glory. There are no double standards in the scriptures.



Ozark

 

[verizon1]

Originally posted by Mike Beidler


In short, the "signs in the sky" are not to be taken literally. The cultures of that period understood the language to be metaphoric; indeed, a close comparison of Middle Eastern apocalyptic literature and Scripture will show that the sun being darkened, the moon turning to blood, and the stars falling from the sky actually represented the downfall of a particular nation or religious system. These doomed nations did not expect to see these things, but they certainly knew that the words contained descriptions of divine judgment.

One thing that I fell prey to in my 30 years as a futurist was not reading the Bible in the cultural contexts that it was written; instead, I imposed my 21st-century view upon the Scriptures and tried to glean meaning from it that wasn't there or wasn't intended byt the Author. We can't forget to read the Bible from the point-of-view of the audience for which a particular book was written. And we also can't separate the culture of the New Testament from the culture of the Old Testament. They were the SAME culture and we should expect the readers of the New Testament to interpret the language of the Apostles and Jesus in the same manner as they interpreted the language of the prophets of old.

So did these things actually happen? Literally and physically, no. Literally and spiritually, yes. The cosmos did not disappear, but the literal nations under judgment certainly did.

If you are Muslim like some people are claiming, I'm sure you can answer this question for me: are there any passages in the Quran that use poetic and/or apocalyptic language reserved for judgment of people or nations? I'd be interested to know if there are literary parallels between the Quran and the Bible.

Hi Mike Can you give us some scripture on how these things were fulfilled? Anyone can say they were fulfilled without giving scriptire. I am a Muslim and I and other have come to this fourm to learn about christianity for our selfs.

Where we come from your New Testament is false and not apart of the Bible because Jesus did not return on the clouds of heavn or before his disciples died as he said he would.

Untill now we had never heard anyone saying that Jesus had returned and fulfilled his word. So we are looking into these things. So can you give us some scripture on these things.

Thank you.

 

[chagal was here]

verizon1,

i want to thank you for your questions. It is good for us who are christians to see ourselves from an outsider's viewpoint.

May the One God guide you to truth.
jcarter

 

[Mike Beidler]

Originally posted by verizon1


Hi Mike Can you give us some scripture on how these things were fulfilled? Anyone can say they were fulfilled without giving scriptire. I am a Muslim and I and other have come to this fourm to learn about christianity for our selfs.

Where we come from your New Testament is false and not apart of the Bible because Jesus did not return on the clouds of heavn or before his disciples died as he said he would.

Untill now we had never heard anyone saying that Jesus had returned and fulfilled his word. So we are looking into these things. So can you give us some scripture on these things.

Thank you.

If you're asking for Scriptural verification of those nations' downfalls (e.g, the destruction of Babylon, Edom, etc.), there may be some, but I really can't give you anything concrete at the moment. However, history proves the fulfillment of those particular passages, not necessarily Scripture itself.

As for Christ's prophecy regarding His coming (along with the "sun, moon, stars" motif), history will also prove this event in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Christ DID come in the metaphorical clouds of glory, i.e., in judgment against Israel through the use of the Roman armies.

However, there may be some eyewitness verification of those events, if one still wishes a physical presence of Christ and His angels in the clouds. Josephus, the Jewish historian, gives this account:

"Besides these, a few days after that feast, on the one-and-twentieth day of the month Artemisius, [Jyar,] a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence."

 

[Manifestation1*AD70]

Originally posted by verizon1


Hi Mike Can you give us some scripture on how these things were fulfilled? Anyone can say they were fulfilled without giving scriptire. I am a Muslim and I and other have come to this fourm to learn about christianity for our selfs.

Where we come from your New Testament is false and not apart of the Bible because Jesus did not return on the clouds of heavn or before his disciples died as he said he would.

Untill now we had never heard anyone saying that Jesus had returned and fulfilled his word. So we are looking into these things. So can you give us some scripture on these things.

Thank you.

Hang in there verizon1 there are biblical answers to these questions as well in the Bible. I would like to give other preterist a turn to answer your questions as will. So just hang in there your questions (will be answered with the Bible).

Your servent in Christ

 

[NumberOneSon]

Hey Verizon,

There won't be any scriptures describing how the NT prophecies were fulfilled in 70AD because all of the NT was written before 70AD (including Revelation). But there are Old Testament scriptures that use the same "apocalyptic" style that depict the destruction of people, cities, and nations that Mike mentioned earlier.

The collapse or end of the "world"": Is 13:9-10 (fall of Babylon by the Medes), Jer 4:23-29 (judgment against Judah), Is 34:3-5 (prophesy against the nations), Is 21:18-23 (people of the earth).

God coming in the clouds in judgment: Is 19:1, Ps 18:7-15, Mic 1:3-4

Hope that helps.

In Christ,

Acts6:5

 

[Manifestation1*AD70]

Hi verizon here are some more Old Testament scriptures you can add to Mikes and Acts.

Immediately after the distress of those days " 'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken (Matthew 24:29).

Compare to Jehovah's coming to O.T. Babylon in 539 BC (Isa 13:10-13, 13:1, and 13:17), or Jehovah's coming to Nineveh in 612 BC (Nahum 1). Or Jehovah's coming to Edom in 703 BC (Isa 34:3-5), or His coming to Egypt in 572 BC (Eze 32:7-11) . The sun, moon, and stars are not literal but speak of the downfall of rulers and authorities.

Isaiah 13:10-17 uses this exact language to speak of the conflict of the Medes and the Babylonians. Rev 12:1-4; Rev 8:10-9:2 use the casting down of stars to speak of rulers. Isaiah 14:12 calls Nebuchadnezzar the Morning Star cast down to earth.

In Rev 1:20, the stars are rulers/messengers of the Churches. The "shaking of the heavens and earth" was used by Haggai in 2:7 and 2:21-23 to speak of political overturnings when the great Persian empire was all aflame with rebellion and conflict and the Jews were expecting this to work in their favor as they were being restored to Palestine and rebuilding the Temple.

Such "de-creation of heaven and earth" language is used in Psalm 18:5-16 to describe the downfall of Saul's Kingdom. In Isaiah 13:6-19, we see that destruction of heavens and earth pertain to when the Medes broke up the Babylonian empire. Nahum applies this earth-shattering metaphor to Yahweh's judgment of Ninevah (Nahum 1:1-5). Isaiah applies this language to Edom of 703 BC (Isa 34:3-8). Ezekiel applies this language to Babylon's victory over Egypt (572 BC) in Ezekiel 32:7-11.

We can understand New Testament prophecy a lot better if we understand how terminology was used in the Old Testament. We must immerse ourselves in the culture, history, language and religion of the Jews of Jesus' day if we hope to go any further and deeper into our understanding.of the Bible.

Salvation is of the Jews. Christianity is not some totally new religion. It is the fulfillment of the promises made to the Jews (on behalf of the Gentiles as well) Romans 15:8-12.

We all hope this helps.

 

[NumberOneSon]

Good stuff, Mani!

 

[gwyyn]

Ok how do you decide whether to use the greek or hebrew translation?? I can look up a word in my strongs and there's like 5 different definations. So how do ya'll decide? justwhich ever one suits you?

 

[davo]

Originally posted by gwyyn
Ok how do you decide whether to use the greek or hebrew translation?? I can look up a word in my strongs and there's like 5 different definations. So how do ya'll decide? justwhich ever one suits you?

 

If you are interested you can obtain an Greek lexicon. There are basically 2 types -one will give you every place in the NT where a particular word occurs [usually gives the root word], the other gives every word in the NT and gives its "parsing" -this tells you the specific tense of verbs and other moods etc -this lexicon is handy when using an interlinear bible [a bible containing both Greek and English in comparison]. You can get the same for the Septuagint which is the OT in Greek which the early church used [actually, the majority of OT quotes found in the NT are from the Septuagint also known as the LXX]. The above is the same for finding the meaning of words from the Hebrew scriptures i.e., OT. 

davo

 

[npetreley]

Ok how do you decide whether to use the greek or hebrew translation?? I can look up a word in my strongs and there's like 5 different definations. So how do ya'll decide? justwhich ever one suits you?

The OT is Hebrew, and the NT is Greek. So go for the appropriate definition/language/context depending on the OT or NT. As davo said, you can also get a copy of the Septuagint, which is a Greek translation from the Hebrew. It sometimes helps. I find it extremely useful because IMO it makes some passages in Daniel clear that are otherwise very fuzzy.

I strongly recommend that you don't just get a lexicon and Greek/Hebrew dictionaries, though. Try to get an Gree and/or Hebrew interlinear Bible. I've got a great English/Greek interlinear Bible that prints the English right above the Greek words, so you can really follow what's going on with the language.

Finally, I recommend this URL -- there's a "KJV with Strongs definitions" link there that lets you move the mouse over each word in a verse, and it will show you the Strongs definition for the word under the mouse pointer. Very handy.

http://www.olivetree.com/bible/index.html

 

[verizon1]

Very good things here. Thanks to everyone for your time. We are going to take a little time to look over the things you have said. We have other question that we would like to ask also in a day or so. Thank you

 

[verizon1]

In short, we have gone over the apocalyptic literature in Scripture and can see a close comparison and parallels between of the Middle Eastern apocalyptic literature.
Understanding that Jesus was a Jew we can see how he would used this same Middle Eastern apocalyptic literature from the Old Testament. We are not says that Jesus is God, at this time mind you.

Our next question to you preterist would be this then. If the Christians church, indeed believes that Jesus is the same God, in the Old Testament who rides the clouds of heaven in judgement by other nations. And we do agree that the Old Testament languages was not to be taken literally.
Why do they turn right around and make Jesus into a false prophet when he told the high priest that he would see his return as the people did in the Old Testament? (Matt. 26:62-64) Something just does not sit right here.
Why would they make Jesus a false prophet according
to his own words Deu. 18:21-22 . Also where were the preterist Christians all this time?

Thank you

 

[Mike Beidler]

Originally posted by verizon1
In short, we have gone over the apocalyptic literature in Scripture and can see a close comparison and parallels between of the Middle Eastern apocalyptic literature.  Understanding that Jesus was a Jew we can see how he would used this same Middle Eastern apocalyptic literature from the Old Testament. We are not says that Jesus is God, at this time mind you.

Very good, Verizon1!!!  It's good to see someone actually doing their "homework"!!!   

You state that, at this time, you do not believe Jesus is God.  And this is solely because you don't believe he fulfilled the prophecies he made about Himself, correct?

Our next question to you preterist would be this then. If the Christians church, indeed believes that Jesus is the same God, in the Old Testament who rides the clouds of heaven in judgement by other nations. And we do agree that the Old Testament languages was not to be taken literally.  Why do they turn right around and make Jesus into a false prophet when he told the high priest that he would see his return as the people did in the Old Testament? (Matt. 26:62-64) Something just does not sit right here.  Why would they make Jesus a false prophet according
to his own words Deu. 18:21-22 . Also where were the preterist Christians all this time?

If I'm understanding you correctly, you're wondering why the early Christian church supposedly turned Jesus into a false prophet by saying Jesus didn't return in AD 70, despite the fact that history verifies the prophecy (if you accept the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 as His return in judgment).  A very interesting question, Verizon1.

I'm still researching this issue, but I would venture to guess that it was because a majority of the early church (a LARGE portion of which was made up of Gentiles probably not familiar with Near Eastern literature or culture) was looking for a physical Kingdom instead of a spiritual Kingdom.  This majority view, unfortunately, would eventually overtake the minority view that understood Christ's words as they were meant to be understood.

It's my opinion that Christ's statement that when "He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth" is not meant to be applied to the church as a body.  In fact, it was meant only for those to whom He was speaking: his disciples.  Notice what Jesus says next:  "for He [the Holy Spirit] will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come."  Does the Holy Spirit regularly disclose to us what is to come?  No.  He did that only for his Apostles.  This was Christ's promise that the Word of God, as long as it was preached by the Apostles either orally or in written form, would not be tainted by error.

Thus, it is certainly possible (and quite evident looking at history) that a majority of the Church could fall into error at some point in its history.  I'm not surprised that preterist views fell out of favor.

Honestly, Verizon1, I'm sure someone else on this message thread could give you a much better answer than I.  Manifestation?  Franklin?  Davo?  Parousia70? 

"A little hep here would be hot!"  --Jar Jar Binks, Star Wars: Episode I—The Phantom Menace

 

[Manifestation1*AD70]

Originally posted by Mike Beidler


Very good, Verizon1!!!  It's good to see someone actually doing their "homework"!!!   

You state that, at this time, you do not believe Jesus is God.  And this is solely because you don't believe he fulfilled the prophecies he made about Himself, correct?



If I'm understanding you correctly, you're wondering why the early Christian church supposedly turned Jesus into a false prophet by saying Jesus didn't return in AD 70, despite the fact that history verifies the prophecy (if you accept the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 as His return in judgment).  A very interesting question, Verizon1.

I'm still researching this issue, but I would venture to guess that it was because a majority of the early church (a LARGE portion of which was made up of Gentiles probably not familiar with Near Eastern literature or culture) was looking for a physical Kingdom instead of a spiritual Kingdom.  This majority view, unfortunately, would eventually overtake the minority view that understood Christ's words as they were meant to be understood.

It's my opinion that Christ's statement that when "He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth" is not meant to be applied to the church as a body.  In fact, it was meant only for those to whom He was speaking: his disciples.  Notice what Jesus says next:  "for He [the Holy Spirit] will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come."  Does the Holy Spirit regularly disclose to us what is to come?  No.  He did that only for his Apostles.  This was Christ's promise that the Word of God, as long as it was preached by the Apostles either orally or in written form, would not be tainted by error.

Thus, it is certainly possible (and quite evident looking at history) that a majority of the Church could fall into error at some point in its history.  I'm not surprised that preterist views fell out of favor.

Honestly, Verizon1, I'm sure someone else on this message thread could give you a much better answer than I.  Manifestation?  Franklin?  Davo?  Parousia70? 

[/I]

Your doing a great job so far Mike.  As a matter of fact you have also pionted out something I had never thought of.