Fallacies of Preterism

[Biblewriter]

re #1. You (ie Price) are very confident of inserting a couple thousand years into a coherent message where you like. why? Because it is there or because you need to?

--Inter

Scripture indicates a gap in the prophecy of the seventy weeks revealed to Daniel, beginning with the following words: "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy." (Daniel 9:24)

First, we need to understand that, although most of our English translations say seventy weeks, the Hebrew word translated weeks was shabuwa' (word number 7620 in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary) This word was used in the Old Testament for both a period of seven days and a period of seven years. Only the context could show whether days of years was meant. An in this case, the context clearly shows that the meaning could not even possibly been days. So it is not simply interpretation to take seventy weeks as meaning 490 years. This is a fully legitimate significance of the Hebrew words used here.

Daniel was told, "Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times." (Daniel 9:26) Here we have sixty-nine weeks, or 483 years, from the going forth of the commandment to Messiah the Prince. Some claim that there is historical evidence that the triumphal entry occurred exactly 483 years, to the day, after the signing of this order. I cannot personally testify as to the accuracy of this claim. But history indeed confirms that it occurred at approximately that time.

But now the Divinely inspired account contains a break. We read, "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined." (Daniel 9:25-26)

Two things were to happen after the sixty-two week second part of this account. And we know that both of them indeed happened exactly as explicitly stated. “Messiah” would “be cut off,” and “the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.” Messiah was indeed cut off, and the city and the sanctuary were indeed destroyed. We know from history that these two events did not happen within a seven year period. Most historians feel that the actual date of Jesus’ birth was 4 BC. Since Jesus lived thirty-three years, that puts his death in 29 A.D. But the city was not destroyed until 70 A.D., forty-one years later. So even if there are small errors in the accepted dates of history, we absolutely know that “the city and the sanctuary” were not destroyed in the same week (seven year period) that our Lord was crucified. But we need to notice that both of these events are presented before the last week is even mentioned. So here we see an absolutely undeniable break in the scriptural account of the seventy weeks.

But the last week is treated differently. It does not even say that this is the seventieth week. The only reason we know that it is the seventieth week is because all the rest of the weeks had already been used up. So this week had to be the seventieth one. We read, "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." (Daniel 9:27)

Now many imagine that this verse speaks of the cross. They want to interpret the word “for” in this verse as “in,” and claim that this was speaking of Jesus confirming God’s covenant with us “in” the seventieth week, and claim that Jesus was crucified at the middle of the seventieth week. But even if history were wrong by so many years, this interpretation does violence to the structure of the prophecy. For the last week is not even mentioned until after the two events that were to take place after the sixty-ninth week.

But an end time covenant that will not be fulfilled is clearly mentioned in other Old Testament prophecies. One of these is Isaiah 28:14-18, where we read, “Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem. Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves: Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste. Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place. And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.”

Again, in Isaiah 57:7-9 we read, “Upon a lofty and high mountain hast thou set thy bed: even thither wentest thou up to offer sacrifice. Behind the doors also and the posts hast thou set up thy remembrance: for thou hast discovered thyself to another than me, and art gone up; thou hast enlarged thy bed, and made thee a covenant with them; thou lovedst their bed where thou sawest it. And thou wentest to the king with ointment, and didst increase thy perfumes, and didst send thy messengers far off, and didst debase thyself even unto hell.”

So we see that the scriptures indeed clearly foretell a future covenant that God will not allow to be fulfilled. Daniel 9:27 is only one of several places where this covenant in mentioned.

Others imagine that the existence of this gap is a relatively new concept, first developed by the dispensational teachers of the nineteenth century. But this is an error. The oldest Christian commentary on Bible prophecy of any significant length that has survived to the present day is the last ten chapters of the famous work by Irenaeus titled “Against Heresies,” which is believed to have been written between the years 186 and 188. In this work Irenaeus spoke of the reign of an evil ruler whom he taught would come in the future, calling him “Antichrist,” and saying:

“And then he points out the time that his tyranny shall last, during which the saints shall be put to flight, they who offer a pure sacrifice unto God: ‘And in the midst of the week,’ he says, ‘the sacrifice and the libation shall be taken away, and the abomination of desolation [shall be brought] into the temple: even unto the consummation of the time shall the desolation be complete.’Now three years and six months constitute the half-week.” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book V, chapter XXV, section 4)

So there can be no rational debate that Irenaeus taught that the last of the seventy weeks revealed to Daniel would be fulfilled in his own future, not in his past.
Something on the order of twenty or so years after Irenaeus penned these words, Hyppolytus wrote the very oldest Christian commentary on scripture that has survived to the present day. His work was a commentary on Daniel which is thought to have been written sometime between the years 202 and 211. Hyppolytus very clearly taught a gap in the prophecy of the seventy weeks, saying:

“For after sixty-two weeks was fulfilled and after Christ has come and the Gospel has been preached in every place, times having been spun out, the end remains one week away, in which Elijah and Enoch shall be present and in its half the abomination of desolation, the Antichrist, shall appear who threatens desolation of the world. After he comes, sacrifice and drink offering, which now in every way is offered by the nations to God, shall be taken away.” (Commentary on Daniel, by Hyppolytus, book 4, 35.3, as translated by T. C. Schmidt, and as available online at http://www.chronicon.net.)

Later in this same work, Hyppolytus said:

“Just as also he spoke to Daniel, “And he shall establish a covenant with many for one week and it will be that in the half of the week he shall take away my sacrifice and drink offering,” so that the one week may be shown as divided into two, after the two witnesses will have preached for three and a half years, the Antichrist will wage war against the saints the remainder of the week and will desolate all the world so that what was spoken may be fulfilled, “And they will give the abomination of desolation one thousand two hundred ninety days. Blessed is he who endures to Christ and reaches the one thousand three hundred thirty-five days!” (Commentary on Daniel, by Hyppolytus, book 4, 50.2)

Since these are the only two surviving documents from this period that spoke of the subject, we see that this gap in the seventy weeks revealed to Daniel was not only indicated in the very text of the scriptures themselves, it was also taught by every Christian writer who commented on the subject in the first two centuries of the history of the church. (That is, of course, every such writer whose works have survived to the present day.)

The length of this gap is never stated in scripture. But every Christian writer from before the year 200 who commented on when these things would take place, and whose works have been preserved, thought that it would be at the end of earth's six thousandth year. ( Epistle of Barnabas, chapter XV, Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book V, chapter XXVII, sections 2-3 and book V, chapter XXXIII, section 2) Since they used the chronology of the Septuagint, that would mean that they expected the gap to be around 450 to 500 years.

Every other Christian writer who wrote on Bible Prophecy before the year 200, and whose works have been preserved, said there would be a future kingdom on this earth that would last a thousand years. (Dialogue With Trypho, by Justin Martyr, chapters LXXX-LXXXI and Eusebius' comments on Papias, The Church History, by Eusebius, book III, chapter XXXIX, sections 12-13.)


Indeed, in the early church this opinion was so all prevalent that in the fifth century Justin wrote that "We should therefore concur with the traditional interpretation of all the commentators of the Christian Church, that at the end of the world, when the Roman Empire is to be destroyed, there shall be ten kings who will partition the Roman world amongst themselves. Then an insignificant eleventh king will arise, who will overcome three of the ten kings." (Jerome’s comments on Daniel 7:8, as found in “Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel,” translated by Gleason L. Archer, Jr., published by Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1958.)

 

[Biblewriter]

It is a "holier than thou" label used as an excuse to ignore about two thirds of the Bible. (The Old Testament historical books and all the prophetic books.)

It forgets the clear statements of the apostles that:

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

and:

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2 Peter 1:19-21)

and also:

"Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand." (Revelation 1:3)

Thus, we have the words of the Holy Ghost, as given through three different apostles, telling us to pay heed to these things. So who should we listen to, God, or you?

 

[Biblewriter]

re #2: the instructions of Mt 24 & //s are not to "the Jews." They are to His followers, believers. And in fact, when the over-the-top pretend messiahs of 66+ showed themselves, the Christians did leave for Pella in the Trans-Jordan.

--Inter

I have quite recently read the entire account of this period, as recorded by Josephus. And he very clearly stated that there were many (four, if I remember correctly) false messiah's that arose during that time. But he also vary clearly stated that the majority of the people did not believe or follow them.

Jesus said that when the false messiah He was speaking of came, the people would believe him. He said, "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive." (John 5:43) The early Christians understood this to be a reference to the coming Antichrist. Irenaeus said, 'The Lord also spoke as follows to those who did not believe in Him: “I have come in my Father’s name, and ye have not received Me: when another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive,”' calling Antichrist “the other,” because he is alienated from the Lord." (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, 5.25.4)

 

[Biblewriter]

Many people have observed that the cosmic end of the world was implied as being after the destruction of Jerusalem in Mt 24 & //s. But this is also in a message in which he also said 'only the Father knows the times'! 2 Pet 3 answers this dilemma (unless you think the 'coming' there is the 1st): God simply wants to delay the end, to save even more people.
--Inter

I find it amazing that you denounce those that think "that the cosmic end of the world was implied as being after the destruction of Jerusalem," and then proceed to describe why that is correct.

 

[Biblewriter]

I think you mean the 'prince.' However, the antecedent of the paragraph is the Messiah. I think you mean the verb 'cut off, but not for himself.' That is the sacrifice of the Gospel by Messiah.

--Inter

It is a universal rule of language that the introduction of the personal pronoun, he or she, refers to the last person of that sex that had been mentioned, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

In this case, the last person mentioned is not the Messiah, but "the prince that shall come, as we read, "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." (Daniel 9:26-27)

 

[Biblewriter]

i think you mean Mt 23:39 (not :29). This (like the end of Rom 11) is a contingency and is rhetorical, but not a chronology. Huge difference. Actually, since some people did just say/sing that in praise of Jesus, I think you kind of missed the action. He is condemning Judaism. That's ch. 23. The people in it who won't sing what the followers sang won't see/understand him. You are assuming 'see' is very plain and optical. Instead it is loaded with the paradox of the times, the blindness of Judaism as it was. Why could it not mean what Jn 9 means, that they can't percieve?

You are also assuming that 'until the fullness' in Rom 11 is an alternate focus of God's instead of just the duration. Or rather, assuming that all the action goes back to focus on Israel, even though he has just explained that the now-concluded focus is on all people-groups and if that makes Israel jealous, they should channel their jealousy into belief. After the calamity of Jerusalem in AD 70, it might be easy for people to think something like this would happen, and many church leaders did start thinking that way a generation later (cf Biblewriter for quotes on that). But that does not mean it was how the apostles saw things, and last I checked, we were to base ourselves on the apostle's teaching. there may have been 'futurist' prophecy beliefs in the next generation of leaders, but I'm not interested. I'm trying to restore apostolic beliefs.

--Inter

I agree that price;s reason #4 is somewhat confused, and I am not certain it is correct as to detail. But your answer that both the section referred and the end or Romans 11 is a contingency is groundless interpretation. Romans 11 explicitly says it is not contingent upon anything. "For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance." (Romans 11:29) A contingency is indeed mentioned in Romans 11:23 in the words, "And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again." (Romans 11:23) But other scriptures explicitly state that this contingency will indeed be met, That there is indeed a day coming in which "All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart." will repent with bitter weeping, (Zechariah 12:14) and that "it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem:" (Isaiah 4:3)


And I have already pointed out that, instead of a generation later, the earliest of the ancient documents that clearly stated the future nature of these prophecies was written in the same generation as the time Irenaeus said the Revelation was given.

 

[Biblewriter]

as I have described many times here, we have a coherent message from Jesus. It is an immediate warning about horrible things happening to that generation of Judaism because the Judaizers would react to the Gospel instead of become its missionaries (like Paul). It consisted of:

pretend messiahs,
a Judaistic police-state (hence the warning about Sabbath violations) and
a failed 'messianic' war (this is what many Dead Sea Scrolls, the War Scroll, the War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness are about).

In light of keeping Jesus' message coherent, yet applicable to the future, I accept the idea that the things that happened in the 7th decade could replicate. They would basically look the same. there would need to be an aggressive and mean-spirited Judaism. There would need to be pretend messiahs (there is only one true one). There would need to be a 'messianic' war--and isn't it strange how many 'Christians' are interested in being part of that!

--Inter

I have already pointed out that this is pure imagination. There is not even a single scripture that even suggests that this scenario would have to be reproduced.

I have broken up your multiple point post to give individual answers to each point.

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[ebedmelech]

I agree that views on eschatology have zero bearing on salvation. I do not question that status of a preterist as a Cristian, but as a student of scripture.

You see things as "figurative, symbolic, [or] imagery" when the scriptures flatly say they will happen. I reject this as simply not believing what the Bible says. I understand that you think that it does not mean what it says, but my answer is: Huh?

I fully agree that the visions in prophecy are symbolic, rather than literal. I have often pointed out, even here in this forum, that without even one exception, every prophetic vision recorded in the Bible for which a divinely inspired interpretation is also recorded, the meaning was something entirely different from what the prophet saw happening.

But explicit statements of coming events are markedly different. But the Bible is filled with explicit statementsthat certain events would happen, which events indeed happened exactly as stated, down to the finest detail. For this reason I conclude that explicit statements that specific events will happen mean exactly what they say.

An example of this is Daniel 11. From verse 2 to the middle of verse 35, every event predicted actually happened. It was all literally fulfilled exactly as stated, down to the finest detail. Indeed, it so accurately describes the multi-generational war between the Ptolemaic empire and the Selucid empire that unbelievers agrue that its very accuracy proves it could not have been written before the events actually took place. But then the last part of verse 35 says "even to the time of the end; because it is yet for a time appointed." Then the account continues from verse 36 to the end of the chapter.

Now we know from scripture that this was revealed to Daniel long before any of it took place. So we know the entire account was written before any of it happened. But why would we even imagine that the portion of this that was explicitly reserved until a later time would not be fulfilled as literally as the first part of the account was.

Now the only preterism could even possibly be correct is if the last part of the chapter suddenly changed to symbolic language. This, to my mind, is an infathomable conclusion. I find it totally irrational.

There are many such cases in scripture. Wars that have never taken place are described in high detail. Invaders that have never attacked are specifically named. To assume that all this is simply figurative speech is irrational.

No Biblewriter...what it's is your resistance to accept the symbolic as well as the imagery in scripture.

I'm not following your point on Daniel 11...make it clearer.

 

[Interplanner]

Well, Price and others think it is OK for Mt 24 & //s to be incoherent. That means that gaps of thousands of years fly in and out without any problem. They don't find that incoherent. For ex., their are intense warnings in both near and distant timeframes (as they have designated them). In 24:26, the warnings are in 1st century Judaic settings: ignore the pretend messiah out in the desert or in the inner room of the temple. So either the Price theory is wrong, or the events replicate in a couple thousand years, because we know these things did happen in the near timeframe of the 7th decade, and the subject (false messiah) was carried through from the paragraph above. Yet it is in a block or paragraph that is about the coming of the Son of Man. And a time designation that this generation would see these things happen.

What is much more likely than the Price theory is that God did decide against the end of the world as we know it "immediately after" the destruction of Jerusalem, which is the ordinary of meaning of Mt 24 & //s. Maybe that's why there is an 'escape door' in v. 36 etc. And then why 2 Pet 3 reads as it does.

Having said all, this I have often wondered if the references to the Son of Man even in Mt 24 & //s are about the Gospel (the betrayal and crucifixion) because, relative to Judaism, they were totally unexpected events for a Messiah. But the sky was darkened, and the nations mourned, and there was a carcass. It makes all the concern about the distant future meaning very irrelevant.

--Inter

 

[ebedmelech]

Well, Price and others think it is OK for Mt 24 & //s to be incoherent. That means that gaps of thousands of years fly in and out without any problem. They don't find that incoherent. For ex., their are intense warnings in both near and distant timeframes (as they have designated them). In 24:26, the warnings are in 1st century Judaic settings: ignore the pretend messiah out in the desert or in the inner room of the temple. So either the Price theory is wrong, or the events replicate in a couple thousand years, because we know these things did happen in the near timeframe of the 7th decade, and the subject (false messiah) was carried through from the paragraph above. Yet it is in a block or paragraph that is about the coming of the Son of Man. And a time designation that this generation would see these things happen.

What is much more likely than the Price theory is that God did decide against the end of the world as we know it "immediately after" the destruction of Jerusalem, which is the ordinary of meaning of Mt 24 & //s. Maybe that's why there is an 'escape door' in v. 36 etc. And then why 2 Pet 3 reads as it does.

Having said all, this I have often wondered if the references to the Son of Man even in Mt 24 & //s are about the Gospel (the betrayal and crucifixion) because, relative to Judaism, they were totally unexpected events for a Messiah. But the sky was darkened, and the nations mourned, and there was a carcass. It makes all the concern about the distant future meaning very irrelevant.

--Inter

The only part of Matthew 24 that I think we can look at as typical of conditions throughout time would be verses 4-14. Jesus was describing conditions that will exist always. They are the "beginning of birth pangs". Typical of what Paul says of creation suffering birth pains in Romans 8.

Likewise when we speak of "the great tribulation" of Matthew 24. He is speaking of that time in particular but the church has suffered tribulation since it's birth. As Paul also tells us "tribulation brings about perseverance" and that too, is typical of the church through it's existence.

We Christians in America have been spared to a great degree but in this day the ridicule is mounting in this country and it will get worse. Was it not President Obama that said the "Sermon on the Mount" was "radical"?

 

[Interplanner]

re#26 by Biblewriter. do you see that your assumption is that the gift in Rom 11 is the land, the restoration? If that is not the assumption, it is fulfilled in another way: to be able to be ministers of the Gospel like any other human? What if the gift is justification by grace, as the sermon in Acts 13 says?

Also, is it very solid to take Irenaeus at face value on the date of Rev?

--Inter

 

[Interplanner]

re#31 by ebed: Mt 24 & //s are too particular to say that section will always exist. It is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that is written, and it is Judean in location.

to find a global reach to the passage, you have to be past the destruction of Jerusalem, when Mt is saying "but immediately after those days..."

--Inter

 

[Interplanner]

re # 27 by Biblewriter. There are many futurists who think those things will replicate. Actually, they think they will happen in the future and sketch them exactly the same as the events of the 7th decade. It is an attempt to keep the message coherent, although I don't know how they can say they are doing this when one phrase flits back, the next forward, etc. That is how I got to my position: it is about the 7th decade, but it could replicate in the future with the same features. That does not seem likely now with all the layers of things on top of it now. But perhaps the 'enemy' will be Islam, and there will be a pathetic 'messianic' war against Islam, that will fail, etc.

What is odd to me is not that some futurists think those things will happen, but that their excitement is about such things happening. sort of missed the heart of "weep for yourselves and your children; it would be better if they were never born."

Ribera himself described a Jewish temple, a resurgent Judaism and a failed war when he wrote up his counter Reformation futurism to save the name of the Pope.

--Inter

 

[Interplanner]

Re Biblewriter on Dan 11, 12. Yes, there are many things about 11 that are very detailed, although I don't know them all. 12 is more fascinating though, and I wondered if you had noticed the progression. Daniel wants to know when the mentioned resurrection will happen, and the answer is 3.5 years. Hmmm, not so helpful. From when or to when doesn't seem to matter.

So instead of asking when again, he asks a more useful question: what is the outcome of all this? But they are all sealed! I understand your interest in the detail of 11 and it is very important to you to have such detail. So you might be disappointed then by ch 12 I would think.

I'm not disappointed because instead of ending ambiguous, there are verses that to me belong with the end of Dan 9 and describe the calamity of Jerusalem in the 7th decade. When the worship system is disrupted it is roughly that length of time (3.5) to the end of Jerusalem. And a blessing for those who wait 45 days after that. I'm also not disappointed because we can be 'those who lead many to righteousness' ie, to justification by faith in Messiah. Maybe the answer is not what we know but what we do.

--Inter

 

[ebedmelech]

re#31 by ebed: Mt 24 & //s are too particular to say that section will always exist. It is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that is written, and it is Judean in location.

to find a global reach to the passage, you have to be past the destruction of Jerusalem, when Mt is saying "but immediately after those days..."

--Inter

That would be my point Inter, those verses are generic in nature to the world through history. The church has survived through persecutions, wars, earthquakes, and martyrs throughout.

The prophecy really doesn't get Jerusalem specific until vs 15.

 

[Interplanner]

Can't follow you. Why would his answers be so general, when they have asked specifically why this temple crashing event is happening? V. 6s 'but the end is still to come' is a hint that what he is describing is not global yet, but local. Also the section through to 14 resembles material already given in ch 10. I don't see where all those things in ch 10 happened in the short mission excursions they took then; it also refered to the whole transition generation coming, to the 4th through 7th decades.

But after 24:29, yes, it is spreading out to be more of a global end, but wasn't immediately after, after all, because that's up to the Father.

32-35 has always seemed to be a bit of a backflash about that generation, not global things. Maybe not.

__inter

 

[KJV1611Warrior]

There are alot of "theologians" in some of the denominations who do not see that we are in the prophetic years because they allegorize or spiritualize all scripture dealing with the last days and the restoration of Israel. Unless there is clear indication for allegory, even logic and reason dictates that scripture writings should be taken in a literal sense. By allegorizing prophetic scripture these "theologians" can make it say just about anything they want. By applying the promises of God for Israel to the Church, they can do away with any literal fulfillment on earth. Scholars such as these really need to review why it is that they use human rationalization to distort the PLAIN teaching of God's word.

I believe they do this because of their seminary training or because they do not wish to believe what God said about a literal fulfillment that includes a final world-wide judgment and millennial reign of Christ on earth from Jerusalem. They do not understand that the body of Jesus rose very early on the third day and that the body of Christ (the Church) will also rise very early on her third day - a day with the Lord is as a thousand years (2 Peter 3:8); (Hosea 5:15).

Liberty taking with the literal hermeneutic of prophetic scriptures in the past was not as critical a problem to the Church as it is today. In the past the Church in general had less knowledge of the scriptures and the Church was not near the prophetic years. Today, there is widespread access of scripture in the Church, so we do not have that excuse. In addition, there is more danger in applying scriptures meant for Israel to the Church. The theology that the Jews killed Christ and that God has cursed the descendants of Israel and given her promises to the Christian Church in recent times opened the door for the Jewish holocaust under Hitler. Those in replacement theology today may be opening a new door for the predicted worldwide holocaust against the Jews under the Beast Antichrist.

The Church is the body of Christ and is the firstborn into the promise of a new covenant. The Gentiles were grafted into that promise and that covenant because most of Israel rejected their Messiah and the natural branches were broken off so that wild branches could be grafted in (Gentiles). However, that promise and covenant was actually given to the house of Jacob and Judah without any conditions (Jer 31:31). When the nation of Israel acknowledges its offense, all in Israel who call on the name of the Lord will be grafted back in and receive their new covenant promise.

When our Heavenly Father determines that the time has come, He will remove the faithful Church to heaven where she will become one with His Son. The earth at that time will be cleansed of evil doers prior to the return of Jesus in glory with His bride. At that time, He will set up the promised millennial reign on earth ruled from Jerusalem. When this occurs the promise of a new covenant to Israel will be fulfilled as the prophet Joel foretold.

Joel 2:28 And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:

29 And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.

30 And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.

31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come.

32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the Lord hath said, and in the remnant whom the Lord shall call.

3 For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,

2 I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land.

 

[ebedmelech]

To reply to this is this simple...Why would Jesus as well as the disciples Peter, Paul and John warn people in the 1st century about something they would NEVER see happen?

Why would Paul tell the Thessalonians:
5 Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things?
6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed.
7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.

Why would John say:
Rev 1:3
3 Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it; for the time is near.

Why would John tell us in Revelation that he was in the tribulation:
Rev 1:6:
I, John, your brother and fellow partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance which are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus

Why would John tell us these things will "SOON" take place?

You see...you have a problem. Jesus prophesied around 33 A.D. this:
Matt 24:34
34 Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

A generation is 40 years. In 70 A.D. Rome destroyed the temple and left the land desolate! Just as Jesus said. 37 years later...almost a generation! Jesus came in judgment on Jerusalem.

You futurist change the meaning of "this generation" in only that passage...why?

You put a big gap in Daniels 70th week...when there is none why?

You say the 7 Churches are "7 Church ages" why? Scripture doesn't even hint that!

 

[ebedmelech]

To reply to this is this simple...Why would Jesus as well as the disciples Peter,Paul and John warn people in the 1st century about something they would NEVER see happen?

Why would Paul tell the Thessalonians:
5 Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things?
6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed.
7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.

Why would John say:
Rev 1:3
3 Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it; for the time is near.

Why would John tell us in Revelation that he was in the tribulation:
Rev 1:6:
I, John, your brother and fellow partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance which are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus

Why would John tell us these things will "SOON" take place.

You see...you have a problem. Jesus prophesied around 33 A.D. this:
Matt 24:34
34 Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

A generation is 40 years. In 70 A.D. Rome destroyed the temple and left the land desolate! Just as Jesus said. 37 years later...almost a generation!

You futurist change the meaning of "this generation" in only that passage...why?

You put a big gap in Daniels 70th week...when there is none why?

You say Ezekiel's temple (which is a vision) will be built...where does Ezekiel say it will be built? Where does anyone say it will be built?