• 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.

a preterist question

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by chagal was here, Jul 15, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. chagal was here

    chagal was here jack's raging bile

    51
    +0
    1- full preterism argues that Satan and his angels/demons have been defeated and bound and are powerless now - is that correct?

    the question of the presence of evil in the world if satan is defeated, i understand is resolved in that the heart of man is filled with evil and we don't need to tempted to sin...

    2 -but what about "paranormal" activity? Ghosts, pyschic abilities, and the like... Typical evangelical explinations pin these things on demonic activty, but if the devil and his demons are bound up, what might be behind such "paranormal" events?
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. GW

    GW Veteran

    +59
    Christian
    Chagal,

    Check your PM.

    GW
     
  3. Brian45

    Brian45 Senior Member

    +147
    Christian
    Single
    Gee , I wonder what was so sensitive that it couldn't be said on the message board .
     
  4. GW

    GW Veteran

    +59
    Christian
    What is so sensitive? Nothing.

    I sent an email to Chagal as an invite to my new Website. I included a link to my essay on the defeat of Satan as well.

    I am not yet posting a general invite to my site since the messageboard there is only for those who honestly seek to learn the particulars of the preterist view.
     
  5. franklin

    franklin Sexed up atheism = Pantheism

    +218
    Atheist
    Private
    Hi chagal, Actually I'd rather think of it as what the bible says about satan being defeated..... Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; (Heb2:14)
    We can always trust what the scripture has to say.



    You just answered your own question..... But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. (James1:14-15)




    I think we need to depend on biblical explanations over evangelical explanations and the traditions and interpretations of men.  Just what do you mean about paranormal events anyway?  I think its all based on speculation and sensationalism.

     
     
  6. lostthenfound

    lostthenfound Justified by Faith Alone

    14
    +0
    Franklin,

    I feel that you are inferring much from scripture that is not explicit.  Here is what I mean:

    In James 1, James was merely saying that we have fallen natures.  That does not mean that Satan is not tempting us.

    As for Hebrews 2:14, you are inferring from the scripture that Jesus' bodily death IMMEDIATELY defeated Satan.  Yet just 4 verses down says: "Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted." 

    Though our flesh can tempt us simply because we are fallen in nature, this verse does not necessarily discount Satan doing the tempting.  For this verse to be made clear, we must interpret it in light of a verse that is already clear.  So, we look at Ephesians 6:10-12:

    "Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. "

    That clearly shows that these dark spiritual powers are still active.  

    In Christ,

    Michael
     
  7. parousia70

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

    +2,937
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    I would concour with franklin on this.

    You must first define "Paranormal activity".

    I do not know of any bonified "paranormal event" that has not been or can not be challenged as to it's authenticity.

    Satan and Sin are bound and powerless. Powerless to prevent anyone from salvation.

    Yes sin exists, and Just Like Satan, always will exist in torment, but their existance dosen't negate the absolute victory of righteousness over them.

    Sin and Satan may still exist, but they have been forever stripped of the ultimate power they once enjoyed, the power to prevent people from salvation. Sin and satan can never do that again.
     
  8. lostthenfound

    lostthenfound Justified by Faith Alone

    14
    +0
    Satan and Sin are bound and powerless. Powerless to prevent anyone from salvation.

    Satan cannot not and never has been able to prevent our salvation.  That is the sole domain of God.

    Satan merely tries to entice the saved and unsaved with evil.  This distracts the unsaved person from God.  This keeps the saved person from growing in his/her sanctification and bearing fruit.

    He is not bound.  He tempts.  See my post above. 
     
  9. franklin

    franklin Sexed up atheism = Pantheism

    +218
    Atheist
    Private
    Hi Michael, How do you read into these passages that we have fallen natures?  If that is the case then scripture contradicts itself. God did not create us with a sin nature.  James is saying we are drawn away by our own lustful desires.  Read Js1:14-15 again. If that was the case james would have wrote: we are drawn away and entised by the sinful desires that God gave us.... Do you see that anywhere in scripture?  That's the false doctrine of original sin that we've all been taught and mislead about. 



    My question to you Michael is, who was Paul speaking TO? If your reading these passages with 21st century eyes it sounds like Paul is speaking to US two thousand years future just like the futurists have been teaching with their dispensationalist views.  Paul was preparing the first century saints to be able to stand against satan and forces of darkness and satan knew his days were numbered.



    Man today doesn't need any outside help from satan or anyone else to commit sin, our hearts are beyond evil just like it says in Jer17....  I used to believe satan was a real person until I learned how to let scripture speak for itself.  I learned this method from researching preterism and it's teaching.  It's the only consistant answer to all fulfilled scripture and prophecy.
     
  10. Ozarkpreterist

    Ozarkpreterist New Member

    77
    +1
    Lostthenfound,

    What do you think Paul was talking about when he told the church at Rome:

    "And the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet (Romans 16:20)."

    Could it be that something was about to happen concerning Satan?

     

    Ozark
     
  11. parousia70

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

    +2,937
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Others
    Satan was the accuser, he is no longer. Christ stripped him of that authority.

    Sin once prevented man from salvation, sin no longer has that power.

    In fact, Only Sinners get saved.

    Satan has been cast out, and is now suffering eternal torment in the Lake of Fire.

    There is nothing in scripture to support the notion that in order for evil to exist, Satan must be "working it" or "behind it" somehow. Scripture is clear that man is fully capable of sin and evil without Satan's help.

    Scripture is clear that Each man is tempted by his own desires, and Mans heart is evil and deceitful above all else (including satan)

    Satan is finished, Sin is powerless, Christ is victorious!
     
  12. lostthenfound

    lostthenfound Justified by Faith Alone

    14
    +0
    Sorry, had some problems.  Am reposting.
     
  13. lostthenfound

    lostthenfound Justified by Faith Alone

    14
    +0
    Franklin, I completely agree that God did not create man with a sinful nature.  However, His creation was marred when the serpent (Satan) tempted Eve and she tempted Adam.  The act of sinning gave man the knowledge of good and evil, twisting the original design God created.  God even says that man now knows the difference between good and evil. 

    What else is our sinful desires but our sinful nature?  If we were not sinful in nature, why would we be drawn to sin?

    I do not believe God gives us evil desires.  What I DO believe is that God made us with free wills.  If He had not, then we would be nothing but automatons mindlessly serving our God.  If that were the case, we would never have fallen.  Logically, in order for man to sin at all, God could not have made us completely perfect with no possibility for to sin.  If He didn't do that for the angels, why would He do it for us?

    Read the Olivet Discourse.  Then listen to Dr. R.C Sproul, a noted theologian and pastor.  He believes, as do I, that the Olivet Discourse is referring to the fall of the Jewish Age, not the return of Christ.  Also, if Jesus has returned, where does the millenium fall into play?  It has been more than 1000 years since the fall of Jerusalem.

    Who was the serpent in the garden? If the serpent was not Satan, then why would God create a creature to tempt His own creation?  That would contradict James 1:13.  Who tempted Jesus in the desert?  Who was Jesus speaking of when He told the Pharisees and Saducees that their father was the devil?  Who prompted Judas to act (John 13:2)? Who was Paul speaking of in 2 Timothy 2:26? Who was the author of Hebrews speaking of in Hebrews 2:14, the very verse you quoted earlier? Do you discount the scriptures?  :confused: Scripture speaks loud and clear, Franklin.  Satan is real.  You can argue the point as to whether or not he is being held back now or will be later, or whatever you want, but if you claim Satan is not real, you contradict the scripture.
     
  14. lostthenfound

    lostthenfound Justified by Faith Alone

    14
    +0
    That is a nice, round argument.  If all men are sinners, which we are, then only sinners get saved. 

    We sin because of our fallen nature.  I did not say that Satan MUST be the one behind it.  However, man did fall.  Satan did tempt man. Satan CAN be behind it.

    Please cite your scripture source.

    In Christ,

    Michael
     
  15. lostthenfound

    lostthenfound Justified by Faith Alone

    14
    +0
    Ozark,

    Yes, it could be.  But what does "soon" mean to God?  It could mean 5 minutes, 5 days, 5 years, 5 centuries, ... (you get my meaning).

    I say this knowing full well it gives a good argument for the preterist view of the millenium being a phrase and not a full 1000 years. ;)
     
  16. SimpleChristian

    SimpleChristian Member

    194
    +0
    It's funny....I was wondering that all this preterist stuff was and was going to post on it...but after someone explained that idea to me and what it meant I laughed so hard at the absolute far-end ridiculousness of it, the incredible illogical twists and turns that have to be made to even begin to consider such a wackado idea....hold on...I'm laughing again....
     
  17. lostthenfound

    lostthenfound Justified by Faith Alone

    14
    +0
    SimpleChristian,

    The doctrine seems illogical to me, as well.  But at the risk of preaching, you should not disrespect those that hold the view.  You should try to convince them with love and respect, not put them down and laugh at their ideas.

    I believe it illogical to be a secular humanist, also.  But in trying to lead a secular humanist to Christ, I do not laugh at them. :(

    In Christ,

    Michael
     
  18. franklin

    franklin Sexed up atheism = Pantheism

    +218
    Atheist
    Private
    Hi Michael, thanks for your challenging comments and questions... Genesis 3:4-5, "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

    It is wrongly assumed that the serpent here is an angel that had sinned, called "Satan". Having been thrown out of heaven for his sin, he came to earth and tempted Eve to sin. The passage talks about "the serpent." The words "satan" and "devil" do not occur in the whole of the book of Genesis.  The characters involved in the Genesis record of the fall of man are: God, Adam, Eve and the serpent. Nobody else is mentioned. There is no evidence that anything got inside the serpent to make it do what it did. Paul says, "the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty" (2 Corinthians 11:3) - notice that Paul doesn't mention the "devil" beguiling Eve.



    Well, you said yourself that you agreed that God didn't create us with a sinful nature right?  Now I ask you, why would God choose to create us with a sinful nature?  That just doesn't make any sence.  The nature of sin, the nature of justice, and the nature of God are such that it is impossible for men to be born sinners. First, sin is voluntary, second, sin is not a substance, and third, sin is a responsible choice.






    I've listened to Sproul a number of times, his insight on the Olivet Discourse is somewhat interesting, however, I don't see where his views are any different than the futurists and the dispensationalists.  I think he labels himself as a partial preterist because of his view of the fall of the Jewish age in AD70. Most dispensationalist will take that position also.  The thousand years you are referring to is symbolic of completeness and not a literal thousand years as traditionally taught by futurists

     



     
     
  19. davo

    davo Member

    471
    +1
    G'day Michael :wave:

    "He believes, as do I, that the Olivet Discourse is referring to the fall of the Jewish Age" Michael, since you believe the "Olivet Discourse" [as we have it in Mt Mk & Lk], you would then also agree that "this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come" has been fulfilled -in other words the "Great Commission" [as we call it] is complete??

    As you say that the Olivet Discourse is referring to the fall of the Jewish Age you must also believe that the Tribulation and the great "Gathering" have also been fulfilled and complete?? etc etc etc.

    I would have to say that if this is what you are saying -and logic says you must, since you have testified that "the Olivet Discourse is referring to the fall of the Jewish Age", then I am in agreeance with you 100%!

    What I'm wandering is -from where do you find a future Parousia apart from the "Olivet Discourse" -since Paul's letters to the Thessalonians parallels the Olivet Discourse. Not only that, but consider this:

    The Olivet discourse cannot be divided to insert some far distant future 3rd Coming of Christ. Luke’s account confirms this. Luke 21:20-22 was the time when the "Son of Man was revealed." This of course should already be abundantly clear because these were "the Days of Vengeance that all things which are written may be fulfilled." [Luke 21:22].

    Compare this:

    [A] Luke 21:20-21 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. [66-70AD]

    To This:

    Matthew 24:16-18 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. [parallels Luke 21:20-21]

    With This:

    [C] Luke 17:30-31 Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed. In that day, he who is on the housetop, and his goods are in the house, let him not come down to take them away. And likewise the one who is in the field, let him not turn back. [parallels Matthew 24:16-18]


    Conclusion:

    If - [A] Luke 21:20-21 = Matthew 24:16-18

    And - Matthew 24:16-18 = [C] Luke 17:30-31

    Then - [A] Luke 21:20-21 = [C] Luke 17:30-31

    The rules of logic demand that if A=B and if B=C, then 'A' must = 'C.' This beyond doubt proves that Luke 21:20-22 was the "The Day in which the Son of Man was revealed," precisely as Luke 17:30-31 indicates. The time when the Judean Christians fled city and countryside, departing from roofs and fields, not stopping nor turning back, was indeed "The Day when the Son of Man was revealed." We have this unequivocal fact according to Luke 17:30-31, which parallels Matt 24:16-18, which again parallels Luke 21:20-21. With Scripture interpreting Scripture, we find the mid 66-70AD time frame to be the time when the 'Son of Man' was revealed in judgment against Old Covenant apostate Judaism.

    davo
     
  20. Ozarkpreterist

    Ozarkpreterist New Member

    77
    +1
    Lostthenfound,  

    Paul's words were meant to comfort a suffering church. It would be a cruel thing for God to say He was going to do something for these people soon and then wait thousands of years to fulfill His promise. If the Lord told you that He was going to do something for you soon, how would you take it?

    I am no Greek scholar, but the word for soon in Romans 16 is tachos. It means a brief period of time, quickly, shortly, speedily.

    Moreover, can you give me an example in the Bible where God said He would bring judgment soon upon a person or persons then waited thousands or even hundreds of years to do it?

    When we consider the audience, the meaning of the word "soon," and the Biblical precedent for the use of the word "soon," we must conclude that soon means soon.

    Ozark
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...