Preterism, both full & partial, are false.

[3 Resurrections]

They were scattered and separated around 930 B.C., if you're a Preterist, when did they reunite and form a new covenent with God?

They reunited and formed a new covenant with God in Zerubbabel's rebuilt temple in the post-exilic return after their Babylonian exile. That renewed covenant was made in Nehemiah 10:28-29.

"And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the porters, the singers, the Nethinims, and all they that had separated themselves from the people of the lands unto the law of God, their wives, their sons, and their daughters, every one having knowledge, and having understanding; They clave to their brethren, their nobles, and entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God's law, which was given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and do all the commandments of the Lord our Lord, and his judgments and his statutes..."

I just had to google preterist, never heard of this belief before. I thought all Christians agreed that we are still waiting on the end times. Interesting.

God planned more than one "end times" scenario. Daniel 12:7's shattering of the power of the "holy people" was one "end times" period back in the AD 66-70 period, and there will be yet another, different "end times" at the close of fallen mankind's history at the final judgment.

 

[robycop3]

I just had to google preterist, never heard of this belief before. I thought all Christians agreed that we are still waiting on the end times. Interesting.

HI!

Unfortunately, there are some who believe that silliness, but we must remember there are still some who believe the earth is flat. "It takes all kinds..."

 

[endofdayz]

They reunited and formed a new covenant with God in Zerubbabel's rebuilt temple in the post-exilic return after their Babylonian exile. That renewed covenant was made in Nehemiah 10:28-29.

"And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the porters, the singers, the Nethinims, and all they that had separated themselves from the people of the lands unto the law of God, their wives, their sons, and their daughters, every one having knowledge, and having understanding; They clave to their brethren, their nobles, and entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God's law, which was given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and do all the commandments of the Lord our Lord, and his judgments and his statutes..."



God planned more than one "end times" scenario. Daniel 12:7's shattering of the power of the "holy people" was one "end times" period back in the AD 66-70 period, and there will be yet another, different "end times" at the close of fallen mankind's history at the final judgment.

This is wrong.

This isn't talking about any new covenant but an oath to walk in God's law and follow the old covenent given to them by Moses.

If this is correct, then Paul is wrong when he says Israel is blinded in part. According to you, this isn't the case. They made a new covenent before Paul was converted and before Jesus walked the earth.

So there was no reason for Christ to come to earth because according to you a new covenent occurred in the 500's B.C.

You're also saying the time of the gentiles became full before there could be a time of the gentiles.

This is why Preterism is false and I'm glad it's fringe of a fringe that most people don't even know about.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I just had to google preterist, never heard of this belief before. I thought all Christians agreed that we are still waiting on the end times. Interesting.

We're certainly still waiting for certain things to happen, but that doesn't mean nothing relating to "end times" has happened yet. Scripture indicates that the last days or last time/hour began long ago already.

1 John 2:18 Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.

Acts 2:14 Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say. 15 These people are not drunk, as you suppose. It’s only nine in the morning! 16 No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 17 “‘In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams...

Hebrews 1:1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

But, contrary to what preterists would say, the last days are still ongoing today and will continue until the future return of Christ.

2 Peter 3:3 Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”

 

[eclipsenow]

Obviously, Jesus hasn't yet returned, or He'd be here now. Simple fact.

Normally many of us read this chapter as being about the end of the temple and then suddenly jumping to the Return of Jesus, way before Jesus uses the famous phrase in verse 36 "But about THAT DAY or hour no one knows."

Why do we make that jump? Because we don't know the context and meaning of the Old Testament verses being quoted, and so it sounds an awful lot like the end of the world! I used to read this passage as the end of the world - but got really confused when it said "34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." But the world DIDN'T end then. So what does it all mean?

We need to put aside our preconceived ideas and systematically go through this apocalyptic symbolism and try and find what is being quoted from the Old Testament. Because I'm starting to side with Dr Bolt that if we look at the OT verses in context, this is all about God judging Jerusalem and the Old Covenant, and as the temple is destroyed they are to remember that Jesus is reigning from heaven! Indeed, it's because Jesus is reigning that such a thing could even happen!

Also please remember Jesus has just wept over Jerusalem, declared he IS the temple - and knows he is about to be brutally murdered as the ultimate sacrifice. This sometimes abstract thing we call "the gospel" is about to get very real indeed!

MATTHEW 24 “Immediately after the distress of those days“ ‘the sun will be darkened,and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky,and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’”

The stars falling? Surely that’s the end of the world - case closed! Except - this is exactly the language used to describe a kingdom being burned to the ground - not end of this whole universe stuff! Check it out. Remember Isaiah's prophecy against Babylon? It's not the end of the world - just the end of Babylon. God stirs up the Medes and Persians to strike down Babylon. But, typical of Hebrew hyperbolic symbolism - listen to this language!

Isaiah 13

:

"See, the day of the Lord is coming—a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger— to make the land desolate and destroy the sinners within it.

The stars of heaven and their constellations will not show their light. The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light.

"

It's the Day of the Lord

against Babylon in particular

. But it's not the end of the world. Again, this judgement against Jerusalem is so severe it brings to mind

Isaiah 34

: which is a universal judgment against all God's enemies - Edom. More picture language.

Joel 2

describes a vast army of the Lord bringing justice - and uses similar language.

Before them the earth shakes,

the heavens tremble,

the sun and moon are darkened,

and the stars no longer shine.

Isaiah 34

"

All the stars in the sky will be dissolved and the heavens rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine, like shriveled figs from the fig tree

."

So the stars falling and heavens rolled up are symbolic of cosmic judgement. But whose judgement? We learn in the NT that - and could easily be describing the Almighty Judging the Son! All the world's sin, poured out on his head. Horrible, but amazing for us!

Then what do we make of the next bit of Matt 24?

30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.

People are geographically challenged with the direction the Son of Man is travelling. He's not travelling TO the Earth here, but back TO the father!

Check

Daniel 7

.

13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

People always think this is the Lord coming back to earth. What if this is the Lord Jesus, the Son of Man, going back into heaven and being welcomed by the Ancient of Days, God the Father, after dying for us all? Isn't that just the appropriate image for God the Son returning as the "Son of Man" who was killed and now lives? Then he IS given an eternal dominion - the church - and we are reigning in heaven with him now - even as our bodies remain here on earth.

Back to

Matthew 24

31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

The word in the Greek is angelos, and can be translated as Angels, but can also mean

messengers.

What if we've been reading THIS bit wrong as well, and it's actually the apostles gathering in the elect with the message, the gospel? Jesus is a week away from dying. He is about to go through horrible things and the disciples scatter. There have already been false Messiahs on the scene. So immediately after the distress of 'those days' is not really clear in timing.

Check these uses of "angelos" which is not angels but messengers or even spies!

James 2:25

"In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the SPIES and sent them off in a different direction?" (NIV, ESV says "messengers".)

Luke 9:52

"And he sent MESSENGERS ahead of him, who went and entered a village of the Samaritans, to make preparations for him."

It's the same word, angelos. It's about context.

Daniel 7

is about the Son of Man going back to the father and winning a kingdom.

Jesus said his kingdom is not of this world - it's the church instead which is not meant to be a political body.

Daniel 7

• gospel events of Jesus dying then going back to the Ancient of Days = end of Old Covenant, End of Temple, and messengers taking out the gospel. And if I haven't explained it well enough, here are my Reformed Sydney Anglican Ministers doing a better job.

The first half of

Matthew 24

• the readings start at 22:00 minutes in and then the talk.

The second half of Matthew 24 - readings start at 21 minutes in.

(Also, please do not text that mobile number questions as it is only for during the service.)

The Sydney Anglican view is controversial - but this paper compares this and DA Carson and other theologians on this passage. https://thematthewphile.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/matthew-24-25-nt4-2008-lecture-notes.pdf

 

[3 Resurrections]

This is wrong.

This isn't talking about any new covenant but an oath to walk in God's law and follow the old covenent given to them by Moses

This oath taken by the people entering into a curse actually IS a covenant. This was a new generation of Israel making another oath to be obedient to God's laws. It wasn't a change in the Mosaic law itself, but it was a new generation of Israelites taking that oath, which is what made it a new covenant. For 70 years of Babylonian exile, the nation and the temple had lain dead. But during the post-exilic return, those who returned from foreign lands to Jerusalem with their children experienced a revival of the nation of Israel at this time by rejecting the idol worship which had brought judgment upon them, as Ezra admitted in his prayer in Ezra 9.

Because of God's judgment of their fathers' disobedience, Ezra confessed the nation's sin, and said, "And because of all this we make a sure covenant, and write it; and our princes, Levites, and priests, seal unto it. (Nehemiah 9:38). This was the covenant that all the people agreed to in Nehemiah 10:28-29.

Ezekiel predicted that God would also make a "covenant of peace" with Israel and Judah when He would revive and restore them to the land again in the post-exilic return. That was the picture which Ezekiel portrayed by the two sticks of Israel and of Judah being joined and becoming one stick in his hand (Ezekiel 36:16-22).

This new covenant which the people made with God and He with them in the post-exilic return is not the same as the New Covenant in Christ's blood. They are two different new covenants.

So there was no reason for Christ to come to earth because according to you a new covenent occurred in the 500's B.C.

You're also saying the time of the gentiles became full before there could be a time of the gentiles.

No, you are misunderstanding my point.

 

[endofdayz]

This oath taken by the people entering into a curse actually IS a covenant. This was a new generation of Israel making another oath to be obedient to God's laws. It wasn't a change in the Mosaic law itself, but it was a new generation of Israelites taking that oath, which is what made it a new covenant. For 70 years of Babylonian exile, the nation and the temple had lain dead. But during the post-exilic return, those who returned from foreign lands to Jerusalem with their children experienced a revival of the nation of Israel at this time by rejecting the idol worship which had brought judgment upon them, as Ezra admitted in his prayer in Ezra 9.

Because of God's judgment of their fathers' disobedience, Ezra confessed the nation's sin, and said, "And because of all this we make a sure covenant, and write it; and our princes, Levites, and priests, seal unto it. (Nehemiah 9:38). This was the covenant that all the people agreed to in Nehemiah 10:28-29.

Ezekiel predicted that God would also make a "covenant of peace" with Israel and Judah when He would revive and restore them to the land again in the post-exilic return. That was the picture which Ezekiel portrayed by the two sticks of Israel and of Judah being joined and becoming one stick in his hand (Ezekiel 36:16-22).

This new covenant which the people made with God and He with them in the post-exilic return is not the same as the New Covenant in Christ's blood. They are two different new covenants.



No, you are misunderstanding my point.

This is why Preterism is fringe and most people don't accept or know about it.

You try to twist scripture to fit your narrative.

The Covenant between Israel and Judah that I quoted in Jeremiah 50 is about the end times. It's about a new covenant when the blindness of Israel will be taken away.

Jeremiah 50:4 In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the children of Israel shall come, they and the children of Judah together, going and weeping: they shall go, and seek the Lord their God.

5 They shall ask the way to Zion with their faces thitherward, saying, Come, and let us join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual covenant that shall not be forgotten.

Again, there hasn't been a perpetual covenant.

There hasn't been a covenant that shall not be forgotten.

The blindness of Israel hasn't been taken away.

The fulness of the Gentiles hasn't occurred.

This new covenant will be when Israel's blindness is taken away and they accept Christ.

If you have to twist scripture to fit your belief, maybe it's your belief that's wrong.

 

[robycop3]

Normally many of us read this chapter as being about the end of the temple and then suddenly jumping to the Return of Jesus, way before Jesus uses the famous phrase in verse 36 "But about THAT DAY or hour no one knows."

Why do we make that jump? Because we don't know the context and meaning of the Old Testament verses being quoted, and so it sounds an awful lot like the end of the world! I used to read this passage as the end of the world - but got really confused when it said "34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." But the world DIDN'T end then. So what does it all mean?

We need to put aside our preconceived ideas and systematically go through this apocalyptic symbolism and try and find what is being quoted from the Old Testament. Because I'm starting to side with Dr Bolt that if we look at the OT verses in context, this is all about God judging Jerusalem and the Old Covenant, and as the temple is destroyed they are to remember that Jesus is reigning from heaven! Indeed, it's because Jesus is reigning that such a thing could even happen!

Also please remember Jesus has just wept over Jerusalem, declared he IS the temple - and knows he is about to be brutally murdered as the ultimate sacrifice. This sometimes abstract thing we call "the gospel" is about to get very real indeed!

MATTHEW 24 “Immediately after the distress of those days“ ‘the sun will be darkened,and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky,and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’”

The stars falling? Surely that’s the end of the world - case closed! Except - this is exactly the language used to describe a kingdom being burned to the ground - not end of this whole universe stuff! Check it out. Remember Isaiah's prophecy against Babylon? It's not the end of the world - just the end of Babylon. God stirs up the Medes and Persians to strike down Babylon. But, typical of Hebrew hyperbolic symbolism - listen to this language!

Isaiah 13

:

"See, the day of the Lord is coming—a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger— to make the land desolate and destroy the sinners within it.

The stars of heaven and their constellations will not show their light. The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light.

"

It's the Day of the Lord

against Babylon in particular

. But it's not the end of the world. Again, this judgement against Jerusalem is so severe it brings to mind

Isaiah 34

: which is a universal judgment against all God's enemies - Edom. More picture language.

Joel 2

describes a vast army of the Lord bringing justice - and uses similar language.

Before them the earth shakes,

the heavens tremble,

the sun and moon are darkened,

and the stars no longer shine.

Isaiah 34

"

All the stars in the sky will be dissolved and the heavens rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine, like shriveled figs from the fig tree

."

So the stars falling and heavens rolled up are symbolic of cosmic judgement. But whose judgement? We learn in the NT that - and could easily be describing the Almighty Judging the Son! All the world's sin, poured out on his head. Horrible, but amazing for us!

Then what do we make of the next bit of Matt 24?

30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.

People are geographically challenged with the direction the Son of Man is travelling. He's not travelling TO the Earth here, but back TO the father!

Check

Daniel 7

.

13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

People always think this is the Lord coming back to earth. What if this is the Lord Jesus, the Son of Man, going back into heaven and being welcomed by the Ancient of Days, God the Father, after dying for us all? Isn't that just the appropriate image for God the Son returning as the "Son of Man" who was killed and now lives? Then he IS given an eternal dominion - the church - and we are reigning in heaven with him now - even as our bodies remain here on earth.

Back to

Matthew 24

31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

The word in the Greek is angelos, and can be translated as Angels, but can also mean

messengers.

What if we've been reading THIS bit wrong as well, and it's actually the apostles gathering in the elect with the message, the gospel? Jesus is a week away from dying. He is about to go through horrible things and the disciples scatter. There have already been false Messiahs on the scene. So immediately after the distress of 'those days' is not really clear in timing.

Check these uses of "angelos" which is not angels but messengers or even spies!

James 2:25

"In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the SPIES and sent them off in a different direction?" (NIV, ESV says "messengers".)

Luke 9:52

"And he sent MESSENGERS ahead of him, who went and entered a village of the Samaritans, to make preparations for him."

It's the same word, angelos. It's about context.

Daniel 7

is about the Son of Man going back to the father and winning a kingdom.

Jesus said his kingdom is not of this world - it's the church instead which is not meant to be a political body.

Daniel 7

• gospel events of Jesus dying then going back to the Ancient of Days = end of Old Covenant, End of Temple, and messengers taking out the gospel. And if I haven't explained it well enough, here are my Reformed Sydney Anglican Ministers doing a better job.

The first half of

Matthew 24

• the readings start at 22:00 minutes in and then the talk.

The second half of Matthew 24 - readings start at 21 minutes in.

(Also, please do not text that mobile number questions as it is only for during the service.)

The Sydney Anglican view is controversial - but this paper compares this and DA Carson and other theologians on this passage. https://thematthewphile.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/matthew-24-25-nt4-2008-lecture-notes.pdf

I disagree with most of this. We see the TRUTH of the Scriptures unfolded & still unfolding right in fronta us. Jerusalem & the temple were destroyed just as Jesus said. There was, and are, war & rumors of war, just as He said. There's persecution of Christians just as He said. On & on.

Thus, there's no reason to not believe the rest of His prophecies won't be fulfilled literally, to the letter, just as He said. And He said that He'd return immediately after the end of the great trib. The darkening of natural light & falling stars (meteors, of course) will be part of a great cosmic cataclysm, and Jesus will return from the sky to the earth, seen by all, just as He said. (Read more detail in Rev. 19:11-21.)

People, you must believe Scripture just as originally written, correctly translated into our languages. Preterists & other purveyors of false doctrines try to change the meaning of Scriptures that are "inconvenient" to their doctrines. Well, THAT DOESN'T WORK! God said what He meant & meant what He said!

 

[eclipsenow]

This is why Preterism is fringe and most people don't accept or know about it.

You try to twist scripture to fit your narrative.

The Covenant between Israel and Judah that I quoted in Jeremiah 50 is about the end times. It's about a new covenant when the blindness of Israel will be taken away.

Jeremiah 50:4 In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the children of Israel shall come, they and the children of Judah together, going and weeping: they shall go, and seek the Lord their God.

5 They shall ask the way to Zion with their faces thitherward, saying, Come, and let us join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual covenant that shall not be forgotten.

Again, there hasn't been a perpetual covenant.

There hasn't been a covenant that shall not be forgotten.

The blindness of Israel hasn't been taken away.

The fulness of the Gentiles hasn't occurred.

This new covenant will be when Israel's blindness is taken away and they accept Christ.

If you have to twist scripture to fit your belief, maybe it's your belief that's wrong.

Hmm, that's not how the bible fits together.
Israel shmisrael. The bible doesn't care about 1948 really. God cares about Israel the way he cares about Australia. Ethnically what's so Jewish about the Jews? The true Jews were carted out of Jerusalem, settled across the Roman empire, and bred out of existence. I'm an Australian of British descent and probably have as much Jewish DNA in me as those that identify as Jewish that haven't left Israel in 2000 years! They've just intermarried that much over TWO WHOLE MILLENNIA.

Instead, the New Testament claims WE - us Christians - are the descendants of Abraham.

That's us - the church. As 1 Peter 2 says:

"But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light."​

I also found this article helpful.


======================

I had never heard of replacement theology the first time I was accused of believing in it. A lady that had attended our church for some time and who often forwarded me articles praising all things Jewish and Israel accused me of holding to this apparently abhorrent doctrine. I had to look it up on the Internet, where all such truths reside, before responding. One of the sites I visited defines replacement theology this way:

Replacement theology (also known as supersessionism) essentially teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Adherents of replacement theology believe the Jews are no longer God’s chosen people, and God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel.[1]

I’m not sure that I’ve ever met anyone who actually believes that “the church replaces Israel” and I’m sure I’ve never met anyone who believes that “God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel.”

What an odd way of putting things.

The Bible seems to teach quite clearly that Jesus IS Israel and in some sense fulfills all of the hopes and expectations for the nation. He does what they never could. He obeys God perfectly and keeps the law entirely and thereby unlocks all of the promises and blessings that God had said he would give. He then shares those blessings with all people – Jew or Gentile – who put their faith and trust in him.

That is the precise argument that Paul is making in Galatians 3. He says:

"Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. (Galatians 3:16 ESV)"

Jesus Christ is the ultimate focus and referent for the promises of God to Israel! The promises do not land finally on a nation but on a person! The glory and climax of God’s redemptive purpose is not “Israel in the land” but “Christ on the cross”! That’s Christianity 101 the last time I checked. Jesus is the hero and focus of the Bible – not the Jewish people as a whole and all of the blessings won by Jesus are shared equally with all believing people regardless of their ethnicity, gender or class. Isn’t that what Paul goes on to say in the same chapter?

"for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise. (Galatians 3:26–29 ESV)"

I have believed that from my earliest days as a Christian, as indeed has almost every other believer I’ve ever met.

As for the idea that “God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel”; its hard to think of anything more ridiculous than that. What nation on earth exists outside the notice and care of Almighty God? The Bible says that God has plans for Edom for crying out loud, how much more should we believe that he has plans for Israel?

I don’t know of any Christians who believe that God has no specific future plans for the nation of Israel, but I do know that good Christians disagree on what those plans are likely to be. The key text in that discussion is Romans 11:26 where Paul says: “And in this way all Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:26 ESV).

What does he mean by that? He has already said that ‘not all are Israel who are of Israel’ (9:6) so what exactly does he mean and what exactly does God have planned? There are two main answers commonly given to that question.

(1) He means that the full elect of God, Jew and Gentile, will all be gathered into Christ according to God’s perfect will.

That was the position of John Calvin and has had a great deal of support throughout Christian history. According to this view, God has very specific plans to save a great many people from every tribe, tongue and nation, including the nation of Israel. ‘All Israel’ thus refers to all the elect and redeemed Jews and all the elect and redeemed Gentiles collectively. The Gentiles do not replace the Jews but are gathered into Christ alongside.

(2) He means that shortly before the return of Jesus the Jewish people en mass will turn to faith in Christ

This option was dominant among my spiritual ancestors and represents the view that I favour to this day. William Carey and Andrew Fuller for example, two of the founders of The Baptist Missionary Society, both looked forward to a general conversion of the Jewish people prior to the return of Christ. Fuller wrote on this topic at some length in his Expository Remarks Relative To The Conversion Of The Jews. Iain Murray has written convincingly that this was the dominant view of the Puritans, citing for example the venerable Richard Sibbes:

Let no man therefore despair; nor, as I said before, let us despair of the conversion of that are savages in other parts. How bad soever they be, they are of the world, and if the gospel be preached to them, Christ will be ‘believed on in the world’. Christ’s almighty power goeth with his own ordinances to make it effectual… And when the fulness of the gentiles is come in, then comes the conversion of the Jews.[2]

Therefore, however they may differ over the specifics, the vast majority of Bible believing Christians over the ages have in fact believed that God has specific plans for the Jewish people. With them I believe that God plans to bless the people of Israel in and through the person and work of Jesus Christ. I believe that at some point – hopefully very soon – he will pour out on Israel a spirit of grace and supplication and they will look upon the one whom they have pierced and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only son.

I wonder sometimes why this has not already happened. The Apostle Paul found it strange and mysterious even in his own day. He said:

Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!

“For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?” “Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?”

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. (Romans 11:33–36 ESV)

God’s ways are higher than our ways. He knows what he is doing and he has told us what we should be doing. Instead of fighting with each other over the minute details of our eschatology we should be praying for the conversion of every man, woman and child on planet earth; be they rich or poor, slave or free, Jew or Gentile.

Even still, come Lord Jesus.
SDG
Paul Carter
Does Anyone Actually Believe in Replacement Theology? - The Gospel Coalition | Canada​

 

[eclipsenow]

I disagree with most of this.

Of course you do - but you just can't explain why you disagree very well.

We see the TRUTH of the Scriptures unfolded & still unfolding right in fronta us. Jerusalem & the temple were destroyed just as Jesus said.

Yes - 2000 years ago - as were the false Messiahs that started the rebellions that led to the Romans destroying the temple in the first place! There were also earthquakes, etc. It was a wild time.

There was, and are, war & rumors of war, just as He said. There's persecution of Christians just as He said. On & on.

And it comes and goes in waves, much like Revelation which describes this whole era of history as "the gazillion years." (Millennium).

Thus, there's no reason to not believe the rest of His prophecies won't be fulfilled literally, to the letter, just as He said.

That's a BIG 'thus' you smuggled in there.
There were specific prophecies to those specific apostles about how that specific temple would be destroyed in a specific set of geopolitical circumstances. Luke goes further and describe show Jerusalem would be surrounded by Rome. EVERYTHING in this section is fulfilled lead up to and culminating in AD70. Everything.

And He said that He'd return immediately after the end of the great trib.

No - you added that in. You're reading the typical Hebrew hyperbole of the horror of that siege to mathematically. It's describing the horror of EXACTLY what happened in Jerusalem as THAT temple fell - otherwise Jesus is lying to the disciples!

The darkening of natural light & falling stars (meteors, of course) will be part of a great cosmic cataclysm, and Jesus will return from the sky to the earth, seen by all, just as He said. (Read more detail in Rev. 19:11-21.)

No - Revelation 19 hadn't been written yet.
We interpret what Jesus meant about THAT temple being destroyed in THAT generation from the OLD TESTAMENT verses that he was quoting. NOT by artificially - and with no reason - flashing forwards and ripping bits of John's apocalypse out of context.

People, you must believe Scripture just as originally written,

Except you're not! This gospel was written in the context of the Old testament verses Jesus quoted, NOT Revelation. John is adding to what Jesus had already said - not utterly reinterpreting what Jesus himself said.

Also, there just isn't a Great Tribulation. There's a Tribulation. It's been going ever since Jesus was incarnate and crucified. The world will hate us the way it hated him - and the way it put the Apostle John under house arrest. In Revelation 1 John says he shared in their TRIBULATION. He DIDN'T tell his generation to 'stop whinging and toughen up princesses - wait till you see what happens in 2000 years in the GREAT TRIBULATION!" Placing that kind of emphasis on Revelation makes John just callous and absurd.

Preterists & other purveyors of false doctrine

I'm not a Preterist but a Partial Preterist.
I fully believe that John writes about our gospel hope in the Lord Jesus returning. It's just that Revelation is not a timetable of the last days - but a description of the era we live in. I mean, the Lord returns multiple times in Revelation so it can't be a literal timetable!

try to change the meaning of Scriptures that are "inconvenient" to their doctrines.

So you're happy with the idea that Jesus lied to the disciples and was actually talking about thousands of years in their future?

Well, THAT DOESN'T WORK! God said what He meant & meant what He said!

Exactly. When Jesus finally gets down past teaching them about the end of THAT TEMPLE and THESE THINGS (earthquakes, Rome, etc) - and talks about THAT DAY - guess what he says?

We CANNOT know when he'll return. And just to be sure we get it he tells 4 parables to that effect.
Partial Preterism a false teaching? I don't think so.

Futurism makes Jesus out to be lying about the temple to the disciples, and John out to be a callous patronising monster to his generation of suffering Christians - and also makes the book of Revelation utterly irrelevant to all Christians except us lucky lot that FINALLY (apparently) get to understand it! Except no 2 futurists can agree on a single thing! I just have to wait 5 minutes on these forums and someone will post yet ANOTHER timetable - and all the futurists will start getting stuck into each other. Quite revealing really. Time to get the newspaper cuttings and highlighters out! There's another random timeline to come up with! That's obviously MUCH more important than preaching the gospel.

 

[robycop3]

Hmm, that's not how the bible fits together.
Israel shmisrael. The bible doesn't care about 1948 really. God cares about Israel the way he cares about Australia. Ethnically what's so Jewish about the Jews? The true Jews were carted out of Jerusalem, settled across the Roman empire, and bred out of existence. I'm an Australian of British descent and probably have as much Jewish DNA in me as those that identify as Jewish that haven't left Israel in 2000 years! They've just intermarried that much over TWO WHOLE MILLENNIA.

Instead, the New Testament claims WE - us Christians - are the descendants of Abraham.

That's us - the church. As 1 Peter 2 says:

"But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light."​

I also found this article helpful.


======================

I had never heard of replacement theology the first time I was accused of believing in it. A lady that had attended our church for some time and who often forwarded me articles praising all things Jewish and Israel accused me of holding to this apparently abhorrent doctrine. I had to look it up on the Internet, where all such truths reside, before responding. One of the sites I visited defines replacement theology this way:

Replacement theology (also known as supersessionism) essentially teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Adherents of replacement theology believe the Jews are no longer God’s chosen people, and God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel.[1]

I’m not sure that I’ve ever met anyone who actually believes that “the church replaces Israel” and I’m sure I’ve never met anyone who believes that “God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel.”

What an odd way of putting things.

The Bible seems to teach quite clearly that Jesus IS Israel and in some sense fulfills all of the hopes and expectations for the nation. He does what they never could. He obeys God perfectly and keeps the law entirely and thereby unlocks all of the promises and blessings that God had said he would give. He then shares those blessings with all people – Jew or Gentile – who put their faith and trust in him.

That is the precise argument that Paul is making in Galatians 3. He says:

"Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. (Galatians 3:16 ESV)"

Jesus Christ is the ultimate focus and referent for the promises of God to Israel! The promises do not land finally on a nation but on a person! The glory and climax of God’s redemptive purpose is not “Israel in the land” but “Christ on the cross”! That’s Christianity 101 the last time I checked. Jesus is the hero and focus of the Bible – not the Jewish people as a whole and all of the blessings won by Jesus are shared equally with all believing people regardless of their ethnicity, gender or class. Isn’t that what Paul goes on to say in the same chapter?

"for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise. (Galatians 3:26–29 ESV)"

I have believed that from my earliest days as a Christian, as indeed has almost every other believer I’ve ever met.

As for the idea that “God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel”; its hard to think of anything more ridiculous than that. What nation on earth exists outside the notice and care of Almighty God? The Bible says that God has plans for Edom for crying out loud, how much more should we believe that he has plans for Israel?

I don’t know of any Christians who believe that God has no specific future plans for the nation of Israel, but I do know that good Christians disagree on what those plans are likely to be. The key text in that discussion is Romans 11:26 where Paul says: “And in this way all Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:26 ESV).

What does he mean by that? He has already said that ‘not all are Israel who are of Israel’ (9:6) so what exactly does he mean and what exactly does God have planned? There are two main answers commonly given to that question.

(1) He means that the full elect of God, Jew and Gentile, will all be gathered into Christ according to God’s perfect will.

That was the position of John Calvin and has had a great deal of support throughout Christian history. According to this view, God has very specific plans to save a great many people from every tribe, tongue and nation, including the nation of Israel. ‘All Israel’ thus refers to all the elect and redeemed Jews and all the elect and redeemed Gentiles collectively. The Gentiles do not replace the Jews but are gathered into Christ alongside.

(2) He means that shortly before the return of Jesus the Jewish people en mass will turn to faith in Christ

This option was dominant among my spiritual ancestors and represents the view that I favour to this day. William Carey and Andrew Fuller for example, two of the founders of The Baptist Missionary Society, both looked forward to a general conversion of the Jewish people prior to the return of Christ. Fuller wrote on this topic at some length in his Expository Remarks Relative To The Conversion Of The Jews. Iain Murray has written convincingly that this was the dominant view of the Puritans, citing for example the venerable Richard Sibbes:

Let no man therefore despair; nor, as I said before, let us despair of the conversion of that are savages in other parts. How bad soever they be, they are of the world, and if the gospel be preached to them, Christ will be ‘believed on in the world’. Christ’s almighty power goeth with his own ordinances to make it effectual… And when the fulness of the gentiles is come in, then comes the conversion of the Jews.[2]

Therefore, however they may differ over the specifics, the vast majority of Bible believing Christians over the ages have in fact believed that God has specific plans for the Jewish people. With them I believe that God plans to bless the people of Israel in and through the person and work of Jesus Christ. I believe that at some point – hopefully very soon – he will pour out on Israel a spirit of grace and supplication and they will look upon the one whom they have pierced and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only son.

I wonder sometimes why this has not already happened. The Apostle Paul found it strange and mysterious even in his own day. He said:

Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!

“For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?” “Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?”

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. (Romans 11:33–36 ESV)

God’s ways are higher than our ways. He knows what he is doing and he has told us what we should be doing. Instead of fighting with each other over the minute details of our eschatology we should be praying for the conversion of every man, woman and child on planet earth; be they rich or poor, slave or free, Jew or Gentile.

Even still, come Lord Jesus.
SDG
Paul Carter
Does Anyone Actually Believe in Replacement Theology? - The Gospel Coalition | Canada​

The Bible says Israel & Judah will be joined again. I believe Scripture over man's guesswork.

The Jews in Judea were definitely descendants of Judah, Benjamin, & Levi when Jesus was there. Those very same people survived the destruction of J & the temple, their dispersion in 135-136 AD, & umpteen persecutions & pogroms since then, culmination in the nazi holocaust, but still retained their national identity. This was only by God's power. The evidence is right before our eyes, so it's not smart to say today's Jews aren't Jews.

 

[Ed Parenteau]

I posted the verses of Scripture that **PROVE** Jesus will be seen by the world when He returns. So, with all due respect, I don't believe one word of your argument.

The problem you have is, you have to add to scripture this phrase in this scripture Matthew 26: 64Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man "from Hades" seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
If you don't add that to scripture, then your whole doctrine falls apart.
You haven't proven how they will see Him.

 

[robycop3]

Of course you do - but you just can't explain why you disagree very well.

I posted some Scriptures showing why I disagree.

Yes - 2000 years ago - as were the false Messiahs that started the rebellions that led to the Romans destroying the temple in the first place! There were also earthquakes, etc. It was a wild time.

Their dispersion in 135-136 AD was far-worse. The Jews were booted from their land.

And it comes and goes in waves, much like Revelation which describes this whole era of history as "the gazillion years." (Millennium).

The millenium of Rev will be just that-1000 years.

That's a BIG 'thus' you smuggled in there.
There were specific prophecies to those specific apostles about how that specific temple would be destroyed in a specific set of geopolitical circumstances. Luke goes further and describe show Jerusalem would be surrounded by Rome. EVERYTHING in this section is fulfilled lead up to and culminating in AD70. Everything.

NUPE!
No beast.
No abomination of desolation.
No marka the beast.
No worldwide great trib.
No return of Jesus.

No - you added that in. You're reading the typical Hebrew hyperbole of the horror of that siege to mathematically. It's describing the horror of EXACTLY what happened in Jerusalem as THAT temple fell - otherwise Jesus is lying to the disciples!

No one argues that J & the temple weren't destroyed.
But there was no beast, etc. All was NOT fulfilled then.

No - Revelation 19 hadn't been written yet.
We interpret what Jesus meant about THAT temple being destroyed in THAT generation from the OLD TESTAMENT verses that he was quoting. NOT by artificially - and with no reason - flashing forwards and ripping bits of John's apocalypse out of context.

Entirely-separate events. Jerusalem was soon rebuilt. However, when the Jews, with the blessings of the Romans, tried to rebuild the temple in 363 AD, their efforts were stymied by various natural forces such as earthquakes, storms, and fires, likely from pockets of natural gas. It was not God's time for it to be rebuilt. but it WILL be, so the abomination of desolation can occur.

Except you're not! This gospel was written in the context of the Old testament verses Jesus quoted, NOT Revelation. John is adding to what Jesus had already said - not utterly reinterpreting what Jesus himself said.

And Jesus told John the trib will fall upon the whole world. (Rev. 3:7) He foretold the coming of the beast & his empire. And of His return.

Also, there just isn't a Great Tribulation. There's a Tribulation. It's been going ever since Jesus was incarnate and crucified. The world will hate us the way it hated him - and the way it put the Apostle John under house arrest. In Revelation 1 John says he shared in their TRIBULATION. He DIDN'T tell his generation to 'stop whinging and toughen up princesses - wait till you see what happens in 2000 years in the GREAT TRIBULATION!" Placing that kind of emphasis on Revelation makes John just callous and absurd.

Jesus said the trib will be the worst series of calamities ever. Hasn't yet happened, which is obvious.

I'm not a Preterist but a Partial Preterist.
I fully believe that John writes about our gospel hope in the Lord Jesus returning. It's just that Revelation is not a timetable of the last days - but a description of the era we live in. I mean, the Lord returns multiple times in Revelation so it can't be a literal timetable!

His return is described some in Rev. 19:11-21, while the beast is in power.

So you're happy with the idea that Jesus lied to the disciples and was actually talking about thousands of years in their future?

He told them some things that happened soon after, & others that haven't happened yet. That's why He caused them to be written down & preserved.

Exactly. When Jesus finally gets down past teaching them about the end of THAT TEMPLE and THESE THINGS (earthquakes, Rome, etc) - and talks about THAT DAY - guess what he says?

We CANNOT know when he'll return. And just to be sure we get it he tells 4 parables to that effect.
Partial Preterism a false teaching? I don't think so.

Futurism makes Jesus out to be lying about the temple to the disciples, and John out to be a callous patronising monster to his generation of suffering Christians - and also makes the book of Revelation utterly irrelevant to all Christians except us lucky lot that FINALLY (apparently) get to understand it! Except no 2 futurists can agree on a single thing! I just have to wait 5 minutes on these forums and someone will post yet ANOTHER timetable - and all the futurists will start getting stuck into each other. Quite revealing really. Time to get the newspaper cuttings and highlighters out! There's another random timeline to come up with! That's obviously MUCH more important than preaching the gospel.
View attachment 314973

With all due respect, Sir, you may continue to make stuff up to your heart's content. But you won't find too many Christians who believe it.

And telling the TRUTH about eschatology is important to show unsaved people that the Gospel of & about Jesus is the truth & not just another fad.

 

[robycop3]

The problem you have is, you have to add to scripture this phrase in this scripture Matthew 26: 64Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man "from Hades" seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
If you don't add that to scripture, then your whole doctrine falls apart.
You haven't proven how they will see Him.

Jesus said EVERY EYE will see His return, even those who who pierced Him. Since those who pierced Him are long-dead, they'll see Him from hades.

 

[JulieB67]

They reunited and formed a new covenant with God in Zerubbabel's rebuilt temple in the post-exilic return after their Babylonian exile. That renewed covenant was made in Nehemiah 10:28-29.

That was only the House of Judah - Judah/Benjamin and some of the Levites. It was not the full House of Israel. The rest of the tribes were still scattered abroad and we see proof of that in the NT.

 

[robycop3]

That was only the House of Judah - Judah/Benjamin and some of the Levites. It was not the full House of Israel. The rest of the tribes were still scattered abroad and we see proof of that in the NT.

RIGHT!
And they're still scattered today, not knowing their national IDs.

 

[Ed Parenteau]

The fulness of the Gentiles hasn't occurred.

So what happens when the fullness of the Jews and gentiles comes in? Romans 11: 12But if their trespass means riches for the world, and their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring! And of course 11:25Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
So the question comes in what does he mean by fullness? I think Paul answers that in Romans 11: 30For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, 31so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. 32For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.
In my view, the end result of their fullness is that He will have mercy on all people. Isn't that true today?

 

[robycop3]

So what happens when the fullness of the Jews and gentiles comes in? Romans 11: 12But if their trespass means riches for the world, and their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring! And of course 11:25Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
So the question comes in what does he mean by fullness? I think Paul answers that in Romans 11: 30For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, 31so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. 32For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.
In my view, the end result of their fullness is that He will have mercy on all people. Isn't that true today?

There are two possible answers to the "fullness" question.
1.) the time God allows Jerusalem to be occupied by gentiles.
2.) the number of gentiles who are to be saved is reached. (This number known only to God)

 

[3 Resurrections]

That was only the House of Judah - Judah/Benjamin and some of the Levites. It was not the full House of Israel. The rest of the tribes were still scattered abroad and we see proof of that in the NT.

I'm afraid God Himself says otherwise in Ezekiel 36:8-12. This was a prophecy which would be fulfilled after the Babylonian exile. We know that the decree of Cyrus would out into his entire kingdom, inviting all Israelites who had been driven into exile to return to their own land (Ezra 1:2-3). Not everybody returned; even Cyrus acknowledged in Ezra 1:4 that there would be some who would remain among the nations. We know that by the NT texts you mention (the "twelve tribes scattered abroad", for instance). But that does not change the fact that God spoke about the entire house of Israel's tribal members being represented in the post-exilic period for Israel.

God prophesied to the mountains of Israel in Ezekiel 36:8-12, saying, "But ye, O mountains of Israel, ye shall shoot forth your branches, and yield your fruit to my people of Israel; for they are at hand to come. For behold, I am for you, and I will turn unto you, and ye shall be tilled and sown: And I will multiply men upon you, all the house of Israel, even all of it: and the cities shall be inhabited, and the wastes shall be builded: And I will multiply upon you man and beast; and they shall increase and bring fruit: and I will settle you after your old estates, and will do better unto you than at your beginnings: and ye shall know that I am the Lord."

God kept His promise to have the houses of both Israel and Judah restored to the promised land in the post-exilic period; the two sticks of Israel and Judah joined into that single stick in Ezekiel 37:15-22. At that time, they made a covenant with Him again, and He made a covenant with them - a "covenant of peace" (Ezekiel 37:26). But according to the typical pattern for this rebellious nation, they once again broke their covenant and God was obliged to punish them for being the "betrayers and murderers" of their own Messiah.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The Covenant between Israel and Judah that I quoted in Jeremiah 50 is about the end times. It's about a new covenant when the blindness of Israel will be taken away.

The covenant Israel and Judah would make with God in Jeremiah 50 was going to occur after God said he would punish the Babylonian empire of the Chaldeans - not an event in our future. This was another post-exilic prophecy of a combined Israel and Judah returning to the promised land when Cyrus made his decree allowing all of them to return. We can't kidnap this prophecy out of its context and transport it into the future when it has already been fulfilled long ago in the post-exilic return. It's as if you don't even acknowledge that this post-exilic return period after the Babylonian captivity ever happened.