Preterism, both full & partial, are false.

[Timtofly]

Israel ceased to exist = new earth.

New spiritual realities after Christ = new heavens.

No stars in the sky - no wordly kings in the kingdom of heavens (they were in the kingdom of Israel) and the end of Jewish leaders (Saducees, Pharisees, Levites...).

From the point of view of Jews, everything changed.

That happened in 600 BC as well. Why was that not called a new heavens and earth? You may call it that, but first century Israel certainly would not.

 

[Timtofly]

How about you exegete Leviticus 26:19 for us?
19: "and I will break the pride of your power, and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass."

What does that mean? Heaven will literally turn to Iron and the earth will literally turn to brass?
When did that happen?
Or do you say this literal event is still future?

And who is the “you”?
“Your Heaven” “Your Earth”…
Is that you? Me? Who?
Who is this passage addressed to? Is it only for them, or for all people of all time?

Tell us what this passage means, as you understand it.
Clearly you believe it’s literal, no?
The literal heaven and the literal earth, right?



Says which scripture?
Chapter and verse.



Scripture sure does.

In every past fulfilled OT Judgment, God is always depicted as running around on the clouds, cleaving mountains in half, melting them like wax, making them level with the ground, etc...

Yahweh's various day-of-the-Lord judgments were signaled by the prophets with common apocalyptic language that consists of common apocalyptic idioms and metaphoric doom language. See these fulfilled prophecies and note the common apocalyptic metaphors in each:

*Micah 1:1-9 -- Assyrian conquest of Samaria and Jerusalem
*Nahum 1:1-8 -- Nineveh's doom
*Zephaniah 1:1-10,14-18 -- Judgment against Judah
*2 Samuel 22:8-16 -- the destruction of Saul's kingdom
*Ezekiel 32:1-12 -- Judgment against Egypt by Babylon

In each of these fulfilled passages, we read all of the common apocalyptic metaphors to describe Jehovah's comings:

*the destruction of earth
*the bowing of the heavens
*the melting of the mountains like wax
*the blackening of the sun, moon, and stars
*the wiping away of every living thing
*blood as high as the mountains
*the burning of the earth and all that dwell in it (at His presence)
*Etc. etc.

This is known as APOCALYPTIC LANGUAGE, which is used by the prophets to foretell the downfall of nations and individuals by God in history.

Scripture interprets itself, and We have no scriptural instruction to interpret this OT prophesy about the Ancient Assyrian conquest of Jerusalem and Samaria as Metaphor:

The mountains will melt under Him,
And the valleys will split
Like wax before the fire,
Like waters poured down a steep place.

Yet Interpret the same language found in Zechariah 14 in Polar Opposite, Hyper-Literal Fashion.

Scripture simply does not allow for your fanciful hyper literal rendering of this language.

John did not witness past history in Revelation 6. Are you saying the OD was apocalyptic prophecy? Does it matter if the Law has been fulfilled or as long as there are sinful humans, the end is still unfufilled?

I am not here to prove it did not happen in the first century. That is your burden to prove. Paul cleared it up for the church to understand, and yet no one in the 2nd century claimed all the Law had been satisfied. The church argued for another 200 years if Jesus was human or God. If preterist are correct, why did God leave humanity in the dark ages for 1991 years? Why was Satan allowed to decieve the earth letting them think the heaven was iron and the earth brass?

 

[trophy33]

That happened in 600 BC as well. Why was that not called a new heavens and earth? You may call it that, but first century Israel certainly would not.

It was called very similar terms and images, as proved by reading the text of Isaiah. Of course the terms were not 100% the same.

 

[Timtofly]

You are disregarding the biggest change of all in this world. There was no more presence of the Satanic realm operating in this world after AD 70. God had "slain the dragon that is in the sea" with His great and strong sword, as Isaiah 27:1 predicted would happen in that day.

He also "caused the unclean spirits to pass out of the land", as Zechariah 13:2 predicted for the period surrounding the AD 70 siege against Judah and Jerusalem. Any evil influences operating in this world today originate from the evil impulses of the human heart, which is fully capable of creating misery for itself and its fellow creatures.

I guess you missed the part about a corrupt church who took over the government of Europe, who martyred millions of redeemed. Satan and demonic activity never stopped. They call it the dark ages for a reason. The major religions held the people in spiritism and demonic control. The Reformation has taken over 500 years to spread light back into all the darkness. Even some amil have a strange take on what actually happened around the world after the first century Christians took the light to the whole world. You claim it was just humanity that settled back into sin. Are you saying the religion of spiritual darkness had nothing whatsoever to do with extinguishing the light? Atheist would credit science as removing blind trust in the spiritual world, that caused enlightenment. Now you want me to accept there was no spiritual darkness at all?

Satan spoon fed the world science, sacrificing demon activity. Yet science was not the truth of God's Word. The world fell for Satan's deception, while the church thought it was dispelling the darkness with science. All they were doing was exchanging one bondage for another bondage. Changing culture is not God creating new heavens and earth.

You are correct that human imagination changed the world. An imagination that was still corrupted by a sin nature. An imagination that was still held sway by Satan and spiritual darkness.

 

[Timtofly]

It was called very similar terms and images, as proved by reading the text of Isaiah. Of course the terms were not 100% the same.

Israel never came back, after the Northern ten tribes were lost, until 1948. Are you saying that 1948 is the new heavens and earth fulfillment of Isaiah? Yet there still has been non stop conflict since 1948.

 

[parousia70]

John did not witness past history in Revelation 6. Are you saying the OD was apocalyptic prophecy? Does it matter if the Law has been fulfilled or as long as there are sinful humans, the end is still unfufilled?

Well, According to Isaiah and John, in the New Heavens and Earth, Sinful Humans Still exist, so....
(Isaiah 65:17-21, Revelation 22:15)

and yet no one in the 2nd century claimed all the Law had been satisfied.

Except 2nd century ECF's Tertullian, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Melito, Celement of Alexandria all Did... and this contunued through 3rd century with ECF's Origen, Hyppolytus, Cyprian, Victorinus... and on through the 4th, 5th..etc.....

The church argued for another 200 years if Jesus was human or God. If preterist are correct, why did God leave humanity in the dark ages for 1991 years?

He Didn't.

When we accumulate all the individual prophesies that any given ECF on their own DID believe to be fulfilled in 70AD, and put them together, we arrive very near a consistent preterist position, even if they were personally inconsistent on their application thereof.

For certain, the greatest number of the earliest Christians believed that a number of, if not all, prophecies of the Olivet Discourse were fulfilled in the first century destruction of Jerusalem. The challenge, in fact, is to find even one early Christian that didn't teach the Preterist interpretation of Matthew 24. The earliest and most significant writers were in unanimous agreement, proclaiming the fulfillment of these prophecies in the time of the AD70 destruction of the Jewish city, temple and nation.

Here's a snippet:

Origen - Against Celsus | John | Matthew "I challenge anyone to prove my statement untrue if I say that the entire Jewish nation was destroyed less than one whole generation later on account of these sufferings which they inflicted on Jesus. For it was, I believe, forty-two years from the time when they crucified Jesus to the destruction of Jerusalem."

Chrysostom - Homilies on Matthew 24 "Was their house left desolate? Did all the vengeance come upon that generation? It is quite plain that it was so, and no man gainsays it."

Chrysostom - St. Chrysostom's Liturgy "Having in remembrance, therefore, this saving commandment and all those things which have come to pass for us: the Cross, the Grave, the Resurrection on the third day, the Ascension into heaven, the Sitting at the right hand, and the second and glorious Coming"

The ECFs recognized:

(1) that the great tribulation is past, transpiring at AD 66-70
(2) that AD 70 involved a coming of Jesus Christ in judgment

So, while they did not establish a biblically consistent preterism, they were far more preteristic in their understanding of eschatology than most modern futurists. As you, perhaps unwittingly, pointed out, the fact is that the ECFs had their hands full with formulating a consistent Christology (the nature of Christ and the Trinity), and didn't spend as much time formulating an orthodox, systematic eschatology. We DO know that the ECFs had mostly assigned Matthew 24 to the past, and the Protestant Reformers had a majority view that all Matthew 24 was fulfilled in the first century.

Classical preterism (i.e. The Catholic Preterism of the likes of James Aiken, Scott Hahn, St Cryssostom, St Thomas Aquinas, Eusebius, etc...) sees AD 70 as a temporal judgment of God/Christ that is not pertaining to the final advent, except as a general prefiguring of it.

As well as the reformed Thinkers such as C.H Spurgeon

C.H. Spurgeon (NOT a Full Preterist) On New Heavens and Earth (1865)
"Did you ever regret the absence of the burnt-offering, or the red heifer, of any one of the sacrifices and rites of the Jews? Did you ever pine for the feast of tabernacle, or the dedication? No, because, though these were like the old heavens and earth to the Jewish believers, they have passed away, and we now live under the new heavens and a new earth, so far as the dispensation of divine teaching is concerned. The substance is come, and the shadow has gone: and we do not remember it." (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, vol. xxxvii, p. 354).

St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, St. Eusebius all understood this basic principle of bible eschatology, and we really ought to take their words to heart.

As St. Thomas Aquinas taught:
The signs of which we read in the gospels, as Augustine says, writing to Hesychius about the end of the world, refer not only to Christ's [future] coming to judgment, but also to the time of the sack of Jerusalem, and to the coming of Christ in ceaselessly visiting His Church. So that, perhaps, if we consider them carefully, we shall find that none of them refers to the coming advent, as he remarks: because these signs that are mentioned in the gospels, such as wars, fears, and so forth, have been from the beginning of the human race (Thomas Aquinas; Summa Theologica, Supplement Question 73, Article 1)

And even St. Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa (AD 336-395)
"Do we romance about three Resurrections? Do we promise the gluttony of the Millennium? Do we declare that the Jewish animal-sacrifices shall be restored? Do we lower men's hopes again to the Jerusalem below, imagining its rebuilding with stones of a more brilliant material? What charge like these can be brought against us, that our company should be reckoned a thing to be avoided?"

Remember, the ECFs after AD 70 were not inspired in their writings as were the apostles. We must prefer the apostolic teaching over later inventions where they are shown to be in contradiction.

Proximity to an apostle hardly guarantees correctness of doctrine.
Even the apostles' own congregations were making many errors, as we read all through the NT. How much more have later generations made errors? And remember, both Amillennialism and Millennialism grew up together within 100 years after the death of the apostles--these two teachings are entirely opposed to one another. The ECFs of AD 30-70 alone were inspired.

The apostles and Christ unanimously taught a first-century return, and confirmed it when the tribulation, apostasy, man of sin, antichrist, and return to the Asia Minor churches took place. There is no way to make the bible say otherwise. We have the apostolic confirmation of it in the Holy Bible.

The ECFs were not inspired, and unfortunately we are hard pressed to see them agree on much of anything. We can't find agreement from the ECFs on the nature of Christ, on the ministries and fate of the early apostles, on the canon of scripture, on the Trinity, on the Millennium, on much of anything. It took the councils and creeds of the 300s-400s to begin to establish unity in what we now think of as "essentials of doctrine." All those things were discussed for three centuries, but the broad diversity of opinion and disagreement on those topics among beloved ECFs is dizzying.

In contrast, Preterists hold that the "ECFs" of the years AD 30-70 were authoritative, consistent, and inspired of the Holy Spirit in their doctrine and scriptures. While preterists love the later ECFs as much as futurists do--and, as noted above, find copius amounts of support for strong partial preterism among the ECFs as well--we still recognize that they were not inspired nor reliable from any consensus standpoint.

If you want the truth, you must trust the ECFs of AD 30-70 that wrote the New Testament letters.

Why was Satan allowed to decieve the earth letting them think the heaven was iron and the earth brass?

Again, Please exegete Leviticus 26:19

Tell us what it means.
Literal? Why?
Figurative? Why?
Past? When? (and provide proof)
Yet Future? How?

 

[parousia70]

That happened in 600 BC as well. Why was that not called a new heavens and earth?

Because the Covenant did not change.
We Know from scripture that the Change of covenants from Mosaic to Christic was brought about by the shaking and removal of Heaven and Earth (Hebrews 12:18-28)

We also Know from scripture that the Formulation of the Covenant Nation of Israel under Moses in the wilderness was the declared by God to be the Planting of Heaven and the foundation of the earth: (Isaiah 51:16)

Scripture interprets itself quite nicely.

 

[Gundy22]

Partial Preterism rules and rocks!

 

[parousia70]

Israel never came back, after the Northern ten tribes were lost, until 1948.

Yet the People in Modern Israel have no verifiable link to the Pre desolation Hebrew Theocracy do they?
Not genetically, Not Religiously, not Politically...

Are you saying that 1948 is the new heavens and earth fulfillment of Isaiah? Yet there still has been non stop conflict since 1948.

That last sentence alone is enough to prove the people in Modern Israel are not in any sort of covenant relationship with the Living God whatsoever.

Instead of being a proof that Israel remains as God's chosen people, the Yom Kippur attack in 1967, and the attack on Passover, 3/27/02, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Modern Israel are not a people in covenant relationship with Jehovah. We know this from scripture.

Read Exodus 34:23: "Three times in the year all your men shall appear before
the Lord, the Lord God of Israel [passover, pentecost, tabernacles]. For I will cast out the nations before you and enlarge your borders; neither will any man covet your land when you go up to appear before the Lord your God three times in the year."

The promise here is simple and profound. As long as Israel was in covenant relationship with Jehovah, their enemies would not attack them during their holy feast days!

For 1500 years there were no attacks against Israel during her feast days [During the Mosaic Age]. However, the siege of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 took place, the city fell, during Pentecost. What are the implications of that attack in light of Exodus 34? The Seven Day War of 1967 took place on Yom Kippur, Israel's most Holy Day. What are the implications in light of Exodus 34? And the attack on Passover on 3-27-02. What are the ramifications of this attack, on Israel's Holy Day?

If Israel is still God's covenanted people, that Palestinian bomber should never have been allowed by Jehovah to attack during the Passover. If Israel is still God's chosen people the attack of 1967 should never have happened. Instead of Israel's victory at that time being a sign of her elect status, it was, and is, a sign of the direct opposite. It proved, and proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Covenantal promise of Exodus 34 is no longer applicable! But if the Covenantal promise of Exodus 34 is no longer applicable, then the other promises of that Covenant, i.e., the promises of national restoration (e.g. Deuteronomy 30), are also now invalid, abrogated by Jehovah Himself.

Further, the attacks on Yom Kippur and Passover, also prove something else, a direct corollary to everything else. Either the Covenant promise of Exodus 34 is no longer valid, or, the people claiming to be Israel today are not the people of the Covenant of Exodus 34. If the Covenant of Exodus is still valid, but the people in Israel today were attacked in violation of Exodus 34, then what does it say about the identity of the people in Israel today? It says that they cannot be the people of the Covenant of Exodus 34!

 

[Timtofly]

Here's a snippet:

Origen - Against Celsus | John | Matthew "I challenge anyone to prove my statement untrue if I say that the entire Jewish nation was destroyed less than one whole generation later on account of these sufferings which they inflicted on Jesus. For it was, I believe, forty-two years from the time when they crucified Jesus to the destruction of Jerusalem."

Chrysostom - Homilies on Matthew 24 "Was their house left desolate? Did all the vengeance come upon that generation? It is quite plain that it was so, and no man gainsays it."

Chrysostom - St. Chrysostom's Liturgy "Having in remembrance, therefore, this saving commandment and all those things which have come to pass for us: the Cross, the Grave, the Resurrection on the third day, the Ascension into heaven, the Sitting at the right hand, and the second and glorious Coming"

I do not see the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem as proof that the Second Coming happened. Neither did the ECF.

The Second Coming is to restore Jerusalem and Israel. It is not to send them into exile.

We are not arguing the destruction of Jerusalem. We are arguing the restoration of the Second Coming.

Any ECF claiming the Second Coming already happened is as wrong as those who claim that point today.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Refresh my memory. you disagree that there’s only one coming of Christ as a thief prophesied in scripture?
How many times Does Christ come as a thief? 2 times? 50 times? Hundreds? Thousands? Millions?
Or do you say Christ did not come as a thief to those at Sardis in the first century and it’s only one time but is future and was not for them?
What is your disagreement exactly?

I clearly shouldn't waste my time going into any detail on this since you will apparently forget what I say, anyway. Just like you've forgotten what I've said before about this.

So, I'll just say that Revelation 3:3 clearly has a different context and scope than a passage like 2 Peter 3:10-12. So Revelation 3:3, where Jesus talked about coming as a thief to the first century church in Sardis (or to individuals in that church), is not about His future coming, which is a global event.

maybe Because God knows that if people fret about an event not ordained to take place in their lifetime they will withdraw from their obligation to subdue kingdoms and establish righteousness, as history has proven those who obsess about it have done?

You're talking about a minority of Christians who obsess over it, so I don't buy this explanation of why it wouldn't be mentioned in scripture. His future glorious coming is far too significant of an event to not even be mentioned in scripture. But, thankfully, it is mentioned several times.

I guess I’ll take that as a compliment. It’s nice to know someone finds me amazing

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it wasn't a compliment.

I’m glad that understanding, accepting and preaching the “correct” eschatology has Absolutely zero bearing on one’s salvation.

Me, too. It seems to me that you would be in trouble if that was the case, but you probably would think that of me, too. If we were required to be 100% correct then we'd all be in trouble.

 

[Gundy22]

400-year "milleniums" - I know there were one or two apocalyptic non-canonical pieces of writing where there is a 400-year reign instead of 1000 year reign

This tends to make me think the 1000 year reign is not literal
if anone knows the writings that had 400 instead of 1000 - please let me know

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Well, According to Isaiah and John, in the New Heavens and Earth, Sinful Humans Still exist, so....
(Isaiah 65:17-21, Revelation 22:15)

No, John did not teach that at all. Instead, he taught that there would be no more death in the new heavens and new earth (Rev 21:4). The presence of sin would imply the presence of death as well, so your interpretations of Isaiah 65:17-21 and Revelation 22:15 contradict what John taught in Revelation 21:1-4, which is very straightforward.

Isaiah wrote about eternity in a way that people of that time could understand since eternity wasn't really something that people had any concept of until Christ came and provided the way for eternal life.

Revelation 22:15 is talking about those who will be in the lake of fire (see Rev 20:15, Rev 21:8) because of the things that they did during their lives as described in that verse and is not talking about them actually still doing those things in the new heavens and new earth.

 

[Timtofly]

That last sentence alone is enough to prove the people in Modern Israel are not in any sort of covenant relationship with the Living God whatsoever.

No, it is proof the Second Coming has not happened yet. Their heavens are still iron and their earth is still brass.

 

[3 Resurrections]

I guess you missed the part about a corrupt church who took over the government of Europe, who martyred millions of redeemed. Satan and demonic activity never stopped. They call it the dark ages for a reason.

It does not require the actual presence of Satan and his demonic hosts for there to be corruption in the church and oppression of believers in this world. All it takes is the sinful nature of mankind to act out its own evil impulses. The "children of darkness" in this world are always going to oppose the "children of light".

Christ called the Pharisees the "children of the devil" when they opposed His ministry. "The lusts of your father ye will do", He said. This does not require the continued presence of the Satanic realm in this world for the human "children of the devil" to act in an evil manner. Satan was successfully responsible for tempting the original couple to fall into sin, but from then on, sin's effects spread out and have corrupted the human race. Humanity on its own, without Satan or demons around, is just as capable of offending a righteous God, even more so than Satan ever did, because our sins are committed against the grace offered to humanity (which was not offered to the fallen angels).

You are correct that human imagination changed the world. An imagination that was still corrupted by a sin nature.

We agree on this part.

An imagination that was still held sway by Satan and spiritual darkness.

But not on this part, because you are missing all the scripture texts which predicted the demise of Satan and his demonic hosts - and when it would happen. God's consuming fire turned them to ashes long ago in AD 70.

 

[parousia70]

I do not see the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem as proof that the Second Coming happened. Neither did the ECF.

The ECF recognized That AD 70 was the "Coming of the Lord of the Vineyard to destroy those wicked Men and lease His vineyard to a new nation" As foretold in Matthew 21:40-45. The recognized, correctly, that Jesus was the Stone that came and Ground them to Powder, on time, as prophesied.

The Second Coming is to restore Jerusalem and Israel. It is not to send them into exile.

"Restored Israel" consists of King Jesus and His Jewish Followers, with Gentiles grafted into that one nation.
We are not still waiting for that restoration.

 

[parousia70]

I'll just say that Revelation 3:3 clearly has a different context and scope than a passage like 2 Peter 3:10-12. So Revelation 3:3, where Jesus talked about coming as a thief to the first century church in Sardis (or to individuals in that church), is not about His future coming

There is nothing in the text to indicate this "separation" at all. You appear to interpret it thusly, solely because of a pre determined bias, and not because of any scriptural instruction to do so.

How would those at Sardis have known the difference?
Would they have been unfamiliar with 2 Peter 3? or Matthew 24:43, Or 1 Thessalonians 5:2-4?

And what of Revelation 16:15? The same thief's coming as Revelation 3:3 or a different one?
If you say different, then What scripture teaches the difference, and how would the original recipients of John's Revelation have known these 2 "thief's comings" have nothing to do with one another?

COMPARE THIS:
Rev 3:3-4
3 Remember therefore how you have received and heard; hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you. 4 You have a few names even in Sardis who have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with Me in white, for they are worthy.

TO THIS:
Rev 15:16
15 “Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is he who watches, and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame.”

How would the 1st century receiver of John's Book of Revelation know that The thief's coming he needed to watch for and not defile his garments of Rev 3 was a wholly different event from the Thief's coming in rev 15 he was ALSO told to Watch for and not defile His garments?

This sounds like an extreme and minority opinion. Can you point to any scholars that share this view of yours? Or is this your private revelation?

I do commend you for recognizing that the Coming of Christ as a thief in Revelation 3:3 HAD to have taken place for them, back then... but your hardened futurism apparently prevents you from accepting the full implications of taking that position, so you have to assume a searate and distinct coming as a thief is being taught, even in absense of any scriptural instruction to do so.... which is why I'm curious if anyone else holds it. You're the first I've come across.

, which is a global event.

Rather, It was an Empire wide event that took place in "all the land".

You're talking about a minority of Christians who obsess over it

Hardly a minority, at least in this country.
The vast majority of American evangelicals are dispensationalists, and they have been taught that America is doomed by God's will because we are in the last days. This has been their gospel for at least the past 100 years, and so those evangelicals and their kids and their grandkids were taught not to govern, run cities, play baseball, launch universities, or even get into media to fulfill one's duty to Christ. Mere personal piety was taught, the kind that doesn't affect anyone or anything else.
Ideas have consequences. Dispensationalist ideas have disastrous consequences (withdrawal, abandonment, escapism, surrender).

John MacArthur, an ardent end-time advocate sums it all up: "Reclaiming the culture is a pointless, futile exercise. I am convinced we are living in a post-Christian society - a civilization that exists under God's judgment."

That quote right there by Dispensationalist John MacArthur is the reason for the increasing paganization of America. Dispensationalists are conflicted: why reform a supposedly "non-reformable" country, society, or world?

The pagans love that fatalistic, defeated view! They are smarter than the dispensationalists since they fully understand that the world of tomorrow is governed by whoever wants to govern it--be it Christans, pagans, whoever. It took almost two generations for pagans to gradually paganize American values and culture. They believed that once the evangelicals were neutralized by endtimes fantasies, they would be able to take over America's government and institutions and laws through hard work and dedication. They were right.

Sadly, endtimers simply continue to stick their heads in the sand and pray for a rapture rescue, dooming their children and grandchildren to a more paganized America.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but it wasn't a compliment.

I'm still gonna take it as one

Me, too. It seems to me that you would be in trouble if that was the case, but you probably would think that of me, too.

Yep.

If we were required to be 100% correct then we'd all be in trouble.

Praise God, we're not.

 

[parousia70]

Their heavens are still iron and their earth is still brass.

Wait.... so "Heavens and Earth" are NOT LITERAL here??

Is this your claim?

and what do you mean "Their heavens and earth"?

Isn't the Heavens and Earth "ALL our" Heavens and Earth?
How could the literal Heavens and Earth it be just "theirs"?

 

[parousia70]

No, John did not teach that at all. Instead, he taught that there would be no more death in the new heavens and new earth (Rev 21:4).

And Jesus taught it is a present reality for those who believe, and not something we have to wait for:

John 11:26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”

Unless you are claiming the unrepentant will one day share in Christ's victory over Death?

The presence of sin would imply the presence of death as well, so your interpretations of Isaiah 65:17-21 and Revelation 22:15 contradict what John taught in Revelation 21:1-4, which is very straightforward.

Sin and Death exist forever.
The Unrepentant suffer in sin and death for eternity. There is no escape from Sin and Death apart from repentance and Belief on Christ Jesus.

Isaiah wrote about eternity in a way that people of that time could understand since eternity wasn't really something that people had any concept of until Christ came and provided the way for eternal life.

A convenient get around for your position to make this claim, (and becasue of how tight your grip onto your position is, I can see why you would absolutely need to employ it) but where does scripture teach it?

Most futurists apply this to the Millennium, which is also a convenient get around that scripture dosn't actually teach, but you're the first I've heard provide the interpretation you have... know any scholars who hold this view?

Revelation 22:15 is talking about those who will be in the lake of fire (see Rev 20:15, Rev 21:8) because of the things that they did during their lives as described in that verse and is not talking about them actually still doing those things in the new heavens and new earth.

15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.

Present performing Action.
Note that he didn't say "Loved and Practiced"

 

[Spiritual Jew]

There is nothing in the text to indicate this "separation" at all. You appear to interpret it thusly, solely because of a pre determined bias, and not because of any scriptural instruction to do so.

How would those at Sardis have known the difference?
Would they have been unfamiliar with 2 Peter 3? or Matthew 24:43, Or 1 Thessalonians 5:2-4?

And what of Revelation 16:15? The same thief's coming as Revelation 3:3 or a different one?
If you say different, then What scripture teaches the difference, and how would the original recipients of John's Revelation have known these 2 "thief's comings" have nothing to do with one another?

COMPARE THIS:
Rev 3:3-4
3 Remember therefore how you have received and heard; hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you. 4 You have a few names even in Sardis who have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with Me in white, for they are worthy.

TO THIS:
Rev 15:16
15 “Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is he who watches, and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame.”

How would the 1st century receiver of John's Book of Revelation know that The thief's coming he needed to watch for and not defile his garments of Rev 3 was a wholly different event from the Thief's coming in rev 15 he was ALSO told to Watch for and not defile His garments?

This sounds like an extreme and minority opinion. Can you point to any scholars that share this view of yours? Or is this your private revelation?

I don't spend much time reading what scholars think about scripture. I highly doubt that I'm the only one who interprets the verse in this way. But Bible scholars don't have any more of the Holy Spirit than you or I do. We need to rely on the Holy Spirit for understanding, not on scholars who may or may not be relying on the Holy Spirit for understanding.

However, I decided to look up some commentaries on that verse just to see what others say about it and I did find this from the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary:

come on thee as a thief—in special judgment on thee as a Church, with the same stealthiness and as unexpectedly as shall be My visible second coming.

I do commend you for recognizing that the Coming of Christ as a thief in Revelation 3:3 HAD to have taken place for them, back then... but your hardened futurism apparently prevents you from accepting the full implications of taking that position, so you have to assume a searate and distinct coming as a thief is being taught, even in absense of any scriptural instruction to do so.... which is why I'm curious if anyone else holds it. You're the first I've come across.

Where are you seeing any indication in Revelation 3:3 that He is referring to the same event as a passage like 2 Peter 3:10-12? A threat to come like a thief upon a church is no different than Him coming as a thief upon the entire earth? And you're questioning my interpretation? You need to explain how yours makes sense when the context of Revelation 3:3 does not line up with the context of other passages that speak of His coming like a thief as a global event.

Tell me this. Jesus said that no one, including Himself, knows the day or hour of His second coming except for the Father (Matt 24:36, Matt 25:13). So, if that event was what He was talking about in Revelation 3:3 then how could He have known whether or not He was going to come during the lifetimes of those He was rebuking in the first century church in Sardis? That wouldn't make sense.

Hardly a minority, at least in this country.
The vast majority of American evangelicals are dispensationalists, and they have been taught that America is doomed by God's will because we are in the last days. This has been their gospel for at least the past 100 years, and so those evangelicals and their kids and their grandkids were taught not to govern, run cities, play baseball, launch universities, or even get into media to fulfill one's duty to Christ. Mere personal piety was taught, the kind that doesn't affect anyone or anything else.
Ideas have consequences. Dispensationalist ideas have disastrous consequences (withdrawal, abandonment, escapism, surrender).

John MacArthur, an ardent end-time advocate sums it all up: "Reclaiming the culture is a pointless, futile exercise. I am convinced we are living in a post-Christian society - a civilization that exists under God's judgment."

That quote right there by Dispensationalist John MacArthur is the reason for the increasing paganization of America. Dispensationalists are conflicted: why reform a supposedly "non-reformable" country, society, or world?

The pagans love that fatalistic, defeated view! They are smarter than the dispensationalists since they fully understand that the world of tomorrow is governed by whoever wants to govern it--be it Christans, pagans, whoever. It took almost two generations for pagans to gradually paganize American values and culture. They believed that once the evangelicals were neutralized by endtimes fantasies, they would be able to take over America's government and institutions and laws through hard work and dedication. They were right.

Sadly, endtimers simply continue to stick their heads in the sand and pray for a rapture rescue, dooming their children and grandchildren to a more paganized America.

I say again that it is a minority of Christians who are obsessed with the second coming of Christ. Nothing you said above refutes that. And, there are obviously many Christians in the world besides those in America as well, so to draw conclusions about all Christians just from America alone is silly. But, it's not even truth regarding American Christians. It's a minority who get on these Internet forums and message boards to discuss Bible prophecy. Most have end-times beliefs but they don't spend much time actually studying the scriptures for themselves and, no matter what you say, a majority don't obsess over these things.

I'm still gonna take it as one

Hey, go ahead. Why not take everything everyone says as a compliment? Nothing stopping you.