Preterism, both full & partial, are false.

[3 Resurrections]

The phrase “at hand” or “near” is taken from the single Greek word eggizō, and simply means “approaches.” It is not time-specific

That is not the interpretation that God Himself gives for the phrase "at hand". He goes into great detail explaining what "at hand" means back in Ezekiel 12:21-28. In that passage, God tells us that an "at hand" prophecy is NOT "prolonged" into "times that are far off", but they are fulfilled "in YOUR days" to the ones hearing that prophecy for the first time.

We ignore God's own definition of His own terms at our peril.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Entirely wrong.
"all humanity" means JUST THAT, unless you believe Jesus was mistaken.

"All humanity" did NOT see His first coming. Only a few thousand in the Judea area saw Him then.

You have just contradicted yourself above, since "all people" were prophesied to see Christ's first coming, as EP's post quoted from Isaiah 40:5.

As for the Lake of Fire, Isaiah 31:9 gives the city of Jerusalem as the location for the "furnace of fire" which Matthew 13:42 predicted for the punishment of the iniquitous. The Lake of Fire is not a "spiritual" thing; it was a literal location on the earth where Satan the anointed cherub would be destroyed to ashes on the earth, and would no more exist (Ezekiel 28:18-19).

 

[sovereigngrace]

Where are you getting your resources for it not being time specific? I’d actually be really interested if you could share this source.

in the meantime, here’s from helps word studies, which claims the opposite of what you said.

“1448 eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence – even a presence ('It is here') because the moment of this coming happened (i.e. at the beginning of Jesus' ministry)" (J. Schlosser).”

It is hard to take the Preterist sources serious as they are so skewed, bias and unobjective. Anything that appears objective or that suggests a future second coming is swiftly dismissed.

Strong’s Definitions G1451; to make near, i.e. (reflexively) approach.

 

[sovereigngrace]

That is not the interpretation that God Himself gives for the phrase "at hand". He goes into great detail explaining what "at hand" means back in Ezekiel 12:21-28. In that passage, God tells us that an "at hand" prophecy is NOT "prolonged" into "times that are far off", but they are fulfilled "in YOUR days" to the ones hearing that prophecy for the first time.

We ignore God's own definition of His own terms at our peril.

Not so. You reject a future second coming because your teachers have convinced you against that, but the Scriptures teach otherwise. You totally dismiss the 2 questions the disciples asked in Matthew 24 because it interferes with your teaching. It revelas 2 events - one in AD70, the other at the end of the age.

 

[robycop3]

You have just contradicted yourself above, since "all people" were prophesied to see Christ's first coming, as EP's post quoted from Isaiah 40:5.

Nupe! that's about His return, as shown by the preceding verses, especially that Jerusalem has received from the Lord double from all her sins. That hadn't happened yet while Jesus was here the first time.

As for the Lake of Fire, Isaiah 31:9 gives the city of Jerusalem as the location for the "furnace of fire" which Matthew 13:42 predicted for the punishment of the iniquitous. The Lake of Fire is not a "spiritual" thing; it was a literal location on the earth where Satan the anointed cherub would be destroyed to ashes on the earth, and would no more exist (Ezekiel 28:18-19).

Nupe!
Rev. 20:10 10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.[/quote]
The garbage dump outside Jerusalem didn't burn forever & ever. And Satan is still free, as the prevalence of sin proves.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

But I thought it was kind of obvious how this section fitted?

“If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. 23 At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time.

26 “So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the wilderness,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.​

This is apocalyptic language around the horror of the siege of Jerusalem, and how there will be heaps of false messiahs out in the desert trying to lead Israel into rebellion against Rome. Indeed, they cause the horrors of the coming war. They got so annoying to rule that Rome crushed them. Instead of being seduced by these smaller rulers, Jesus is saying here that when he returns it is going to be BIG - like the lightning from East to west. Then he goes on to explain what they are to think about as the temple falls - that he is reigning from heaven.

Except you can't see that because you refuse to address the OT verses Sydney Anglicans point out. That's a little convenient for you - isn't it? Just avoid discussing or researching those OT verses entirely? Just in case it actually shows Jesus quoting verses about national conquest, not the end of the world?

Were there false Messiahs appearing around 70 AD? I don't think Jesus was implying that. I think that is where He went back to answering the other question about His coming and the end of the age. So, we see a division between His answers to the two questions in different places. Once again, I see no basis for thinking that Jesus talked about more than one coming of the Son of man, so I see no reason to think that Matthew 24:27-31 is talking about some other coming of the Son of man than Matthew 24:37-25:46. I stand by that.

You're sounding like an Amil futurist to me. Amil, but with futurist bits - like there ARE things we can know about just before the Return - indicating it's on the way. Hm, not sure about that at all. I'd like to see more open, less poetic discussion of it in the New Testament. There are some big names in your camp - people I respect like DA Carson. But I'm just not there.

Paul indicated that there are certain things that would happen first before His return. Not necessarily specific things that you can point out and say "Look, it's happening. This means He's coming soon.". But, a mass falling away from the faith is one of those things, as he wrote about in 2 Thess 2.

From what I see, the NT seems to indicate it will be a peaceful time, and an utter surprise when He returns.

THAT DAY will come in a time of PEACE and SAFETY

Indeed, rather than a time of great tribulation what do we learn about THAT DAY?

Matthew 24: “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.... For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen

1 Thess 5:3 | "Now, brothers and sisters, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly

It's ironic that you interpret 1 Thess 5:2-3 like futurists typically do as far as thinking it's talking about "peace and safety" in the world. But, it's not talking about peace and safety in the world. Look at the context of the passage.

1 Thessalonians 5:1 Now, brothers and sisters, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, 2 for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3 While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. 4 But you, brothers and sisters, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief. 5 You are all children of the light and children of the day. We do not belong to the night or to the darkness. 6 So then, let us not be like others, who are asleep, but let us be awake and sober.

The context is regarding the spiritual perspective of people regarding their own spiritual status. It has nothing to do with the status of the world in terms of physical peace and safety in the world. Notice it talks about people who are in darkness. Spiritual darkness. They will be thinking they are at peace spiritually and are safe from God's wrath, but then sudden destruction will come down upon them when Christ returns unexpectedly like a thief in the night. Even during times of physical tribulation (pandemics, wars), many people think they are at peace spiritually and are safe from God's wrath and they just go on eating, drinking, marrying and living their lives as normal without any idea that God is not pleased with them.

What can we conclude about when the Lord will return? 4 things:-

• No one knows
• partying = while there might be some places experiencing 'wars and rumours of wars', many people will be rich and partying
• marrying = planning for the future!
• a time of peace and safety

So peace and safety are one reason I don't think there's a little season.

Again, it's not talking about peace and safety in the world, so I believe you are interpreting Matthew 24:37-39 and 1 Thess 5 out of context.

The other? It's to do with the style of literature. As my good friend writes:-
_________________________________________________________

John writes that “many antichrists have come”, reminding us that there has been great opposition to Christ ever since he was born (remember how Herod killed all the babies in Bethlehem trying to get to Jesus?). Throughout the whole Bible, we find characters who are ‘anti’ God’s plans—wicked men, foreign kings, false prophets and ‘the beast’ who features in Revelation 13. Even in Deuteronomy, there are warnings about the rise of prophets who lie and preach rebellion against the true God.
But is there going to be one mega-evil ruler who will deceive the world and lead millions astray and do things like brand ‘666’ on their foreheads?

Probably not. There are passages in the Bible which talk about a particular being who is Christ’s foe (e.g., “the man of lawlessness” in 2 Thessalonians 2 or the dragon of Revelation 12-13 who is identified as the Devil). But this kind of symbolic language is used to describe an attitude or spirit of evil rather than a single evil person. The fact that some parts of Scripture bring ultimate evil to a head by using an individual character to identify it probably says more about how dramatic literature operates than it does about predicting history.

The worst thing about antichrists is that they have come from within the church! The apostle John wrote that they “went out from us, but they did not really belong to us”. This is what antichrists do. They get among believers and try to deceive them, persuading them to believe lies and getting people to follow them and their deceptions rather than Jesus and his truth. They teach that Christ did not come in the flesh (1 Jn 4:1-3); they say it doesn’t matter whether you sin or not (1 Jn 1:5-10); and they neglect their Christian brothers and sisters (1 Jn 4:19-21).

According to God’s word, the antichrist might have sat next to you in the church pew. This isn’t a scene from a horror movie; quite the opposite-it is an everyday event. In this final age before Jesus returns, plenty of opponents of Jesus will arise. And they may even be in church, trying to deceive us and lead us into error. But Christians can be confident and at peace, because there will be a day when all ‘antichristness’ will be done away with.

It’s a bit of a waste of time trying to work out whether the antichrist is Boris Yeltsin, the Dalai Lama, Bill Gates or the Pope. It’s just as likely to be your granny or your next door neighbour, if they are promoting lies about our Lord.

Just make sure it isn’t you …

See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. And this is what he promised us—even eternal life. (1 John 2:24-25)
The devil you know

I actually agree that it doesn't talk about a singular Antichrist and instead talks about many antichrists, but I'm not seeing what this has to do with you thinking there isn't a little season? What about the falling away that Paul wrote about in 2 Thess 2? There were already many antichrists around then and, yet he was talking about the falling away as a future event before the return of Christ and our being gathered to him. Doesn't it make sense that a mass falling away would result in increased wickedness in the world? I believe Satan's little season relates to that.

And, what do you make of Revelation 20:3 and Rev 20:7-9? I asked you about those verses and you didn't respond to that for some reason. I don't know how you can claim there's no little season when Satan's little season is specifically mentioned and described in those verses.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Not so. You reject a future second coming because your teachers have convinced you against that, but the Scriptures teach otherwise.

My teacher is the scripture themselves - not an individual. And I do not reject a future bodily coming of Christ. The only thing is that it will be the third coming, and not the second.

You totally dismiss the 2 questions the disciples asked in Matthew 24 because it interferes with your teaching. It revelas 2 events - one in AD70, the other at the end of the age.

I don't dismiss them. Of course Matthew 24 mentions 2 questions and two events. But the predicted AD 70 events took place at the same time as the "end of the age" when the power of the holy people was to be shattered, according to Daniel 12:7. Other ages were to follow that end of the age, as Paul referred to in "the ages to come" from his perspective on the timeline. We are sitting in one of Paul's "ages to come" now.

Nupe! that's about His return, as shown by the preceding verses, especially that Jerusalem has received from the Lord double from all her sins. That hadn't happened yet while Jesus was here the first time.

Robycop3, you are entirely missing the point being made. If "ALL people" were to witness Christ's first coming, (and, as you say, "ALL people" seeing Christ's first coming was not everybody on the globe), then the "EVERY eye" witnessing Christ second coming also does not necessarily have to refer to everybody on the globe witnessing Christ's second coming simultaneously. It, too, can also be a limited number viewing that second coming. That was the point EP was making in his post.

The Revelation 1:7 verse about "every eye" specifically names the tribes of the land of Israel who would be the ones seeing that return of Christ: "NAMELY" or "EVEN those who pierced Him". And yes, I agree with you that the Jews that had died who killed Christ would actually see Christ's return from Hades. That was because Hades was to be thrown into the Lake of Fire - which was in Jerusalem, as Isaiah 31:9 said Jerusalem was the location for that furnace of fire.

The term "forever" for Satan and his angels to be burned in that Lake of Fire doesn't necessarily mean they are burning in perpetuity. Forever means "to the ages", which can have an end when they have accomplished their purpose. Satan the anointed cherub was going to be turned into ashes, so that he would no longer exist, according to Ezekiel 28:18-19. The current presence of evil in this world is solely the responsibility of wicked humanity's own deceptive heart. No Satanic or demonic presence is required for us to act in a corrupt manner.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

It's apocalyptic hyperbole that even IF (hypothetically) Satan could gather a vast army against God, God's victory would be so overwhelming it's almost an anticlimactic event - it is so sure. That is, Jesus reigns from heaven, the martyrs are secure, as the gospel goes forth the truth is known and Satan is bound by this - and finally it's all inevitable anyway.

This is what you said in response to being asked about Revelation 20:7-9. Sorry, but this is not a strong argument at all. We agree that the thousand years is an actual period of time, but just not a literal thousand years, right? And Satan is bound during that time, right? Well, it talks about Satan's little season occurring when the thousand years ends and he is loosed. How can you not think his little season is an actual period of time? The thousand years does represent a period of time with a beginning and ending but somehow his little season is only hypothetical and not an actual (short) period of time? I don't buy that at all.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Where are you getting your resources for it not being time specific? I’d actually be really interested if you could share this source.

in the meantime, here’s from helps word studies, which claims the opposite of what you said.

“1448 eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence – even a presence ('It is here') because the moment of this coming happened (i.e. at the beginning of Jesus' ministry)" (J. Schlosser).”

It seems to me that the word can be used to refer to things that are continually approaching and getting closer and that are certain to happen some day without implying that those things are going to necessarily literally happen soon. Is it normally used to refer to things that either are already happening or are going to happen soon? Sure. Does it have to be used that way? No, I don't believe so.

Here are the possible definitions of the word from Strong's Concordance:

Detailed definition:

1. To bring near, to join one thing to another.
2. To draw or come near to, to approach.

Something can be continually approaching or coming nearer/closer for a long time. Such as the return of Christ. I believe, for example, that when James said the Lord's coming is near in James 5:8, he was saying His coming was continually approaching each day and was certain to happen. I don't believe he was intending to give any indication that it was certainly going to happen soon. He was only indicating that it was going to happen and since no one knew when it could happen even in the lifetimes of his readers (but not necessarily).

Since we don't know when it will happen we should always be alert spiritually and should be watching for it as it keeps approaching and getting closer every day.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I don't dismiss them. Of course Matthew 24 mentions 2 questions and two events. But the predicted AD 70 events took place at the same time as the "end of the age" when the power of the holy people was to be shattered, according to Daniel 12:7. Other ages were to follow that end of the age, as Paul referred to in "the ages to come" from his perspective on the timeline. We are sitting in one of Paul's "ages to come" now.

You're talking about things that Jesus said here, so you should consider what His understanding of the end of the age would have been. Jesus talked in terms of two ages, so He always had two ages in mind. This temporal age (the end of the age refers to the end of this age) and the eternal age to come.

Luke 20:34 Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36 and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God’s children, since they are children of the resurrection.

This temporal age is marked by people getting married and dying. The eternal age to come, however, will not be ushered in until the resurrection of the dead occurs at the end of this temporal age. At that point people will no longer get married or die.

 

[sovereigngrace]

My teacher is the scripture themselves - not an individual. And I do not reject a future bodily coming of Christ. The only thing is that it will be the third coming, and not the second.



I don't dismiss them. Of course Matthew 24 mentions 2 questions and two events. But the predicted AD 70 events took place at the same time as the "end of the age" when the power of the holy people was to be shattered, according to Daniel 12:7. Other ages were to follow that end of the age, as Paul referred to in "the ages to come" from his perspective on the timeline. We are sitting in one of Paul's "ages to come" now.

Can you please respond to me separate to robycop3, as our beliefs are completely different?

Matthew 24:3 records:

1. “When shall these things be? (speaking about the destruction of the temple/city)”
2. “What shall be the sign of thy coming (parousia), and of the end (or sunteleías meaning completion, or consummation) of the world (aion)?”

Christ addressed both questions and both eras in chapter 24. However, because of the intermingling of His response, many Bible students suffer great confusion in identifying what aspect of the teaching relates to AD 70 and what relates to the Second Coming. Notwithstanding, there is much detail about the days that precede His return.

The word telos, used in 1 Corinthians 1:7-8 and 15:24, is also found in the above passage being coupled to, and prefixed with, the popular Greek word sun (Strong’s 4862) – denoting union and togetherness. The word carries the overall meaning of the entire end.

Premils and Preterists do not believe that “the end” refers to the actual end. The New Testament word from which we get our phrase “the end” is the Greek word telos which refers to the point aimed at as a limit, i.e. the conclusion of an act or state. It refers to the completion. It is the termination point of a thing.

When Scripture simply talks about “the beginning” without any other additional words or contextual reason to identify it with a specific event, then theologians universally agree it is talking about “the beginning” of time/this age/creation. Whilst all sound theologians agree on this, many are inconsistent when it comes to “the end.” The reason probably is because it cuts across a lot of end-time theology they have been taught. However, both should be treated similarly.

Unless Scripture specifically identifies “the end” with a particular event or matter like “the end of barley harvest” (Ruth 2:23) “the end of the sabbath” (Matt 28:1), “the end of the year” (2 Chron 24:23), “the end of the rod” (1 Sam 14:27), or “the end of the commandment” (1 Tim 1:5), etc, etc, then we should understand it as the end of the world (which is the end of the age).

Jesus response to His disciples in Matthew 24:6 and 13-14 is notable: “ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end (or télos) is not yet ... But he that shall endure unto the end (or télos), the same shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end (or télos) come.”

“The end of the age” is normally described as “the end.” Those that endure to the end are promised a glorious reward. The true child of God will persevere to the end because that is his nature. The false professor will not.

If we are to be consistent, if we are to take a word literally, plainly and straightforwardly in its context, then we should take the word “end” to mean the end. 1 Peter 4:7 predicts “the end of all things is at hand.” This is a pretty substantive, unambiguous and climactic statement. Few, if any, would argue that this was not talking about the Second Coming. But few stop to consider the enormity and finality of this Coming.

Jesus continues His response to the disciples’ question reference His coming in Matthew 24:35-44: “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming (parousia) of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming (parousia) of the Son of man be. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up. Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.”

The removal of the current heaven and earth is here connected to the coming of the Lord. After telling us that “heaven and earth shall pass away” Jesus immediately tells us: “of that day and hour knoweth no man.” This final day that is approaching is coming unexpectedly. This fits in with the “thief in the night” scenario found elsewhere in Scripture. It would seem to confirm that the day that Christ returns is the day when the current corrupt natural order (both the creature and creation) is gloriously changed. The wicked and all corruption are destroyed when Jesus comes. The Lord here identifies the passing away of “heaven and earth” with “the coming of the Son of man.”

Christ describes this day as an unanticipated day for many – one that will find many unprepared. For those who are playing at religion they will be caught on. They will face the same punishment as the “hypocrite” when He comes: “there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” The wicked are an all-inclusive group; they include every Christ-rejecter – from the religious professors to the outright profane hypocrites. They will all be caught in the destruction when they are left behind and the “heaven and earth ... pass away.”

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I'll ask you the same question I asked Robocop. And what would Jesus have to say to get you to believe He was coming soon? If you don't believe what He said in the following, then who are you going to believe?
Revelation 1:
1The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. 3Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near.

Revelation 2:
24But I say to the rest of you in Thyatira,.....25Nevertheless, hold fast to what you have until I come.

Revelation 3:
10Because you have kept My command to persevere, I will also keep you from the hour of testing that is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth. 11I am coming soon. Hold fast to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.

Revelation 22:
7“Behold, I am coming soon. Blessed is the one who keeps the words of prophecy in this book.”
10Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of prophecy in this book, because the time is near. 11Let the unrighteous continue to be unrighteous, and the vile continue to be vile; let the righteous continue to practice righteousness, and the holy continue to be holy.”
12“Behold, I am coming soon, and My reward is with Me, to give to each one according to what he has done.
20He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!

In the verses where Jesus said He is coming soon, the KJV translates the Greek word "tachos" (Strong's G5034) as "quickly" instead of "soon" and I think that's a better translation of those verses. He was not saying He was literally coming soon after John wrote the book of Revelation. He was saying that when He does come, it will happen quickly. Which is what He indicated here, also:

Matthew 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

When He comes, He will come so quickly that it will be as quick/fast as lightning comes from the east and shines to the west. And, as Paul indicated in 1 Thess 5:2-3, the destruction that will accompany His return will be "sudden".

If you think that Revelation 1:1-3 is implying that everything John wrote about would literally happen soon after the book was written, then what do you make of the thousand years of Revelation 20? Whether taken literally or figuratively, the thousand years is clearly referring to a long period of time, so it makes no sense to think that the entire thousand years happened soon after the book was written.

Also, your view requires that the book had to be written prior to 70 AD which is highly debatable. When a doctrine depends so much on a book being written before a certain time, you know that doctrine is on shaky ground.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

That is not the interpretation that God Himself gives for the phrase "at hand". He goes into great detail explaining what "at hand" means back in Ezekiel 12:21-28. In that passage, God tells us that an "at hand" prophecy is NOT "prolonged" into "times that are far off", but they are fulfilled "in YOUR days" to the ones hearing that prophecy for the first time.

We ignore God's own definition of His own terms at our peril.

Some of the things written in the book were literally near or at hand and some weren't. To interpret a verse at the beginning of the book to be talking about everything written in the entire book (as if everything written was literally happening soon) requires you to ignore verses like Revelation 1:19 where John is told to write things that happened in the past, were happening at the time and would happen after that. And it requires you to come up with a completely unreasonable explanation for the thousand years referenced in Revelation 20 as well.

 

[claninja]

It is hard to take the Preterist sources serious as they are so skewed, bias and unobjective. Anything that appears objective or that suggests a future second coming is swiftly dismissed.

Strong’s Definitions G1451; to make near, i.e. (reflexively) approach.

helps word studies is skewed, bias, and unobjective?

by the way, Approach means to literally come near.

 

[claninja]

It seems to me that the word can be used to refer to things that are continually approaching and getting closer and that are certain to happen some day without implying that those things are going to necessarily literally happen soon.

not in the perfect indicative tense. In that tense, it means literally near.

“1448 eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence – even a presence ('It is here') because the moment of this coming happened (i.e. at the beginning of Jesus' ministry)" (J. Schlosser).” Helps word studies.

now, when it’s an adjective, it also means near

“
at hand, near, nigh, ready.

From a primary verb agcho (to squeeze or throttle; akin to the base of agkale); near (literally or figuratively, of place or time) -- from, at hand, near, nigh (at hand, unto), ready.” strongs

 

[3 Resurrections]

Some of the things written in the book were literally near or at hand and some weren't.

I agree. Some of what John wrote had taken place in the past - such as the birth and ascension of Christ and the martyrdom of Antipas. Some even the distant past - such as the beginning of the literal thousand-year millennium. Some was presently occurring in John's days- such as the present state of the 7 churches, and some was soon about to take place - in John's generation. All these variously-timed prophecies Revelation 1:19 spoke of.

Some few prophecies were left unrevealed and "sealed up" for future times, including us and our future; namely, the Revelation 10:4 prophecies uttered by the seven thunders. All other "at hand" prophecies in Revelation were being unsealed and revealed by John and the interpreting angel, and were set up to take place in John's days, just as Ezekiel 12:21-28 defines the way we are to interpret "at hand" prophecies. This kind of prophecies are NOT "prolonged" into "times that are far off", according to God Himself telling us in the Ezekiel text how we are to interpret this term.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

helps word studies is skewed, bias, and unobjective?

by the way, Approach means to literally come near.

Yes, but it does not refer to the amount of time it takes to come near. It refers to the fact that something is getting nearer every day regardless of how long it might be until it actually arrives. Christ's return has slowly been approaching for almost 2,000 years. Your death started approaching the day you were born.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I agree. Some of what John wrote had taken place in the past - such as the birth and ascension of Christ and the martyrdom of Antipas. Some even the distant past - such as the beginning of the literal thousand-year millennium. Some was presently occurring in John's days- such as the present state of the 7 churches, and some was soon about to take place - in John's generation. All these variously-timed prophecies Revelation 1:19 spoke of.

Some few prophecies were left unrevealed and "sealed up" for future times, including us and our future; namely, the Revelation 10:4 prophecies uttered by the seven thunders. All other "at hand" prophecies in Revelation were being unsealed and revealed by John and the interpreting angel, and were set up to take place in John's days, just as Ezekiel 12:21-28 defines the way we are to interpret "at hand" prophecies. This kind of prophecies are NOT "prolonged" into "times that are far off", according to God Himself telling us in the Ezekiel text how we are to interpret this term.

Please don't waste your time telling me things you've already told me several times before. What is the point? I didn't agree before and I'm not going to agree now. You have decided that everything relating to the future except unrevealed prophecies were going to happen soon after the book was written and that has led to you coming up with one of the most ridiculous interpretations of Revelation 20 that I've ever seen. So be it.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

not in the perfect indicative tense. In that tense, it means literally near.

“1448 eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence – even a presence ('It is here') because the moment of this coming happened (i.e. at the beginning of Jesus' ministry)" (J. Schlosser).” Helps word studies.

now, when it’s an adjective, it also means near

“
at hand, near, nigh, ready.

From a primary verb agcho (to squeeze or throttle; akin to the base of agkale); near (literally or figuratively, of place or time) -- from, at hand, near, nigh (at hand, unto), ready.” strongs

That's someone's (J. Schlosser's) opinion that you've decided to agree with, yes. I don't agree with him or with you. I understand that the word is normally used to describe things that are happening soon, but it doesn't have to only be used to refer to things that would happen literally soon.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Can you please respond to me separate to robycop3, as our beliefs are completely different?

Apologies for appearing to link you with robycop3's position. I was merely trying to save space by combining both responses in one post.

By the manner in which you replied, it seems you are of the common perception that scripture only speaks of two ages in total. It doesn't limit it to only two ages. There are more. By checking Paul's language when he speaks about ages, there are at least a total of five ages spoken of in scripture. I believe there are a total of 7 millennial ages into which fallen man's history is divided, to be followed by an 8th age when you and I will be resurrected and in God's presence during that age, and all ages to come from then on.

Currently we are at the close of the sixth millennnial age, and just about to enter the 7th millennial age. in little more than a decade. That is why we have the current worldwide turmoil of these present times. It's a transition phase.

But back in John's days, at that time, the transition to the "end" was the end of the "holy people", just as Daniel 12:7 predicted. By the time all of Daniel's prophecies were finished, the power of the holy people was going to be shattered. Which it was by the close of AD 70 when their beloved temple and city of Jerusalem was torn down to the last stone. The end of the "sanctuary of strength" which Daniel 11:31 called the temple was the end of the power of Daniel's people.

When scripture speaks of the heaven and earth "passing away", this was not going to be their annihilation. They were to be "changed like a garment" as Hebrews 1:12 tells us. The present heaven and earth are indeed changed from what they were back in AD 70. That is mainly due to the Satanic realm being eradicated from this world and destroyed to ashes at that time. Heaven was also changed since then, because the resurrected saints who had died before that year were finally admitted into heaven's temple. For the first time ever, the resurrected Christ presented those children of the kingdom to the Father in heaven with exceeding joy. And in the final resurrection for us in the future, we get to join them.