Preterism, both full & partial, are false.

[sovereigngrace]

I'm glad you included this Isaiah text in your descriptions of a new heavens and a new earth. However, try going just a little bit further in that same chapter to understand exactly what God was referring to when He spoke of "the heavens and the earth". It wasn't a physical change in the composition of the material cosmos that He was referring to in this particular context.

"And I have put my words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people." This is not speaking of the establishment of the physical heavens and earth during Creation week, but the establishment of Zion as the people of God.

We are currently in this new heavens and new earth at present. The believers had already come to this "Zion - the city of the living God" (Hebrews 12:22). We don't have to wait for this NHNE in the future, because Hebrews 12:26-28 told us exactly when the heavens and the earth were to be shaken and removed in the past. Hebrews 12:26-27 said that "NOW he hath promised, saying Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. And this word, 'Yet once more', signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Wherefore, we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: For our God is a consuming fire."

That word "NOW" was speaking of the time in which Hebrews was written - not in our future. The believers of that time were then receiving a kingdom which could not be shaken in the coming disasters for the nation of Israel. The earth (tes ges - the land of Israel) and the heavens were soon going to be shaken and removed by God's "consuming fire". That was an old "heavens and earth" reality in the nation of Israel. Those old "heavens and earth" composed of an obsolete, defunct physical temple system that was dead and needed to be physically burned up so that these would not exist any more in feeble, idolatrous competition with Christ's superior New Covenant worship system He had already established.


This change has already occurred. Hebrews wrote that those changed conditions it was speaking of were then coming (Hebrews 2:5). The heavens and earth did "perish" and were "changed" when the New Heavens and the New Earth were manifested back then after the AD 70 era.

The NHNE conditions according to Isaiah 65:20 and Revelation 22:15 would still include the presence of sinners. Isaiah's conditions for the NHNE listed the birth of children, death of both the righteous and the sinner, planting of crops, harvesting and eating, building houses, prayers to God, etc. As believers, formerly-alienated Gentiles and Jews (represented by the unclean animals - such as the wolf and the lion - dwelling amicably with the clean animals - the lamb and the bullock) in this NHNE reality.

We are not waiting for this NHNE - it's a present reality.

Let us have a literal word-by-word look at the Hebrew pertaining to Isaiah 65:20.

לֹא־יִֽהְיֶ֨ה מִשָּׁ֜ם עֹ֗וד ע֤וּל יָמִים֙ וְזָקֵ֔ן אֲשֶׁ֥ר
Lo'- yihªyeh mishaam `owd `uwl yaamiym wªzaaqeen 'ªsher
Not be hence more an infant [of] days, an old man after

לֹֽא־יְמַלֵּ֖א אֶת־יָמָ֑יו כִּ֣י הַנַּ֗עַר בֶּן־מֵאָ֤ה שָׁנָה֙ יָמ֔וּת
Lo'- yªmalee''et- yaamaayw Kiy hana`ar ben- mee'aah shaanaah yaamuwt
Not fulfill your days inasmuch a child old an hundred years die

What is this telling us?

The exact same thing, only in different terms.

This is called synonymous parallelism. It is telling us that a child will never become old on the new earth. This line reinforces what has just been said. It confirms the thought of the impending reality of no more death in the eternal state for the righteous. In eternity there will be no more aging or dying. It is not going to be like our corrupt age where infants eventually get old. It will not be like the here-and-now where a man could live to be an old person of a hundred years of age and then die.

This passage is actually saying the opposite to what many think. What this is saying is: there will be no more aging, curse or death on the new earth. Every glorified saints will have come to full maturity in Christ with their new perfect eternal bodies. It is the next line of Isaiah 65:20 that has confused many, because the translators have not interpreted it in a literal word-for-word sense. It is not saying there will be more babies, death and old men. It is saying the opposite to what they are alleging. It is saying that there will be no more aging: children getting old, old people and people dying! It is describing eternity to an Old Testament audience in terms they can grasp.

The new heavens and new earth will indeed be a glorious victorious perfect state where death is unknown. God is saying that the eternal state will actually be free of death for young and old alike. This passage is telling us that there will be no more death on the new earth! The Hebrew word Lo' (Strong’s 3808) means “no” or “not.” The word is a simple negation. The word is found twice in this much-debated new heavens and new earth verse.

Debate in Isaiah 65:20 centers in on the use of the original word yaamuw meaning “die” or “death.” What should we relate it to? Is there indeed “death” on the new earth? Also, should the death be related to the “child” in the second phrase or the “sinner” in the third phrase? What is more, in what way should it read? I must admit, if we are to read it in its most natural way it fits perfectly with the context. So why change it? I believe it should be applied to the “child” as it should agree with the first phrase that is simply a reinforcement of the same truth. It then fits perfectly with the whole overall teaching of the prophet on the perfection and bliss of the eternal state.

No (Lo') longer will an infant become like an old man,
No (Lo') longer will a child reach one hundred and die.

This is Old Testament verbiage that describes eternity to the Old Testament listener. It is telling us: no one is going to age! This relates to the new heaven and new earth not some supposed future millennium – that will never happen.

The original Hebrew does not give us any reason to attribute death to the “child” in this second line. In fact, it does not fit the whole context which is evidently speaking of the removal of aging and death on the new earth. Interpreting it as we have, seems to (1) match the original, (2) make sense to its context, and (3) taps into the thrust of what the prophet was trying to relay. We need to remind ourselves that the whole idea here is describing the incredible eternal deliverance from the curse of corruption and the joy that “the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind” on the “new earth.”

 

[sovereigngrace]

I'm glad you included this Isaiah text in your descriptions of a new heavens and a new earth. However, try going just a little bit further in that same chapter to understand exactly what God was referring to when He spoke of "the heavens and the earth". It wasn't a physical change in the composition of the material cosmos that He was referring to in this particular context.

"And I have put my words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people." This is not speaking of the establishment of the physical heavens and earth during Creation week, but the establishment of Zion as the people of God.

We are currently in this new heavens and new earth at present. The believers had already come to this "Zion - the city of the living God" (Hebrews 12:22). We don't have to wait for this NHNE in the future, because Hebrews 12:26-28 told us exactly when the heavens and the earth were to be shaken and removed in the past. Hebrews 12:26-27 said that "NOW he hath promised, saying Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. And this word, 'Yet once more', signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Wherefore, we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: For our God is a consuming fire."

That word "NOW" was speaking of the time in which Hebrews was written - not in our future. The believers of that time were then receiving a kingdom which could not be shaken in the coming disasters for the nation of Israel. The earth (tes ges - the land of Israel) and the heavens were soon going to be shaken and removed by God's "consuming fire". That was an old "heavens and earth" reality in the nation of Israel. Those old "heavens and earth" composed of an obsolete, defunct physical temple system that was dead and needed to be physically burned up so that these would not exist any more in feeble, idolatrous competition with Christ's superior New Covenant worship system He had already established.


This change has already occurred. Hebrews wrote that those changed conditions it was speaking of were then coming (Hebrews 2:5). The heavens and earth did "perish" and were "changed" when the New Heavens and the New Earth were manifested back then after the AD 70 era.

The NHNE conditions according to Isaiah 65:20 and Revelation 22:15 would still include the presence of sinners. Isaiah's conditions for the NHNE listed the birth of children, death of both the righteous and the sinner, planting of crops, harvesting and eating, building houses, prayers to God, etc. As believers, formerly-alienated Gentiles and Jews (represented by the unclean animals - such as the wolf and the lion - dwelling amicably with the clean animals - the lamb and the bullock) in this NHNE reality.

We are not waiting for this NHNE - it's a present reality.

There are only two peoples recognized in the book of Revelation, as in the rest of Scripture. One inherits eternal bliss on the new glorified earth and the other inherits eternal torment in the lake of fire.

Revelation 20:15: “And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."

Revelation 21:7-8: “He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.”

Revelation 21:22-27: “And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it. And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.”

Revelation 22:14-15: “Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.”

God is simply summing up the whole unfolding narrative before us showing us the great eternal division between darkness and light, death and life, the wicked and the righteous. They cannot cohabit in eternity.

Basically, He is saying, the wicked miss the boat.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The new heavens and new earth have not arrived.

If you think the New Heavens and the New Earth have not arrived yet, then you are erasing the Hebrews 12:26 verse altogether. That verse tells us that back in the first century, God had promised "NOW" that He was going to shake not just the earth, but also heaven, and REMOVE those things which were made, so that only those things which could NOT be shaken would remain. Time relevant terms such as the word "NOW" cannot be swept under the carpet and disregarded. "NOW" applied to that first century generation when it was written - not to us.

The NHNE is NOT the ultimate eternal state for believers. God will do even better than that for us in the future. Isaiah's NHNE included death, childbirth, and prayers that would still be taking place, as well as having the presence of sinners. None of these things are going to be in the eternal state. Don't you realize that if there is "no marriage or giving in marriage" after the final resurrection, that would mean these children being born in the NHNE (as in Isaiah 65:23) would be bastard children born of fornication? Also, why would the believers even need to offer prayers to God in Isaiah 65:24's NHNE if they are face-to-face in His presence in the eternal state?

 

[sovereigngrace]

If you think the New Heavens and the New Earth have not arrived yet, then you are erasing the Hebrews 12:26 verse altogether. That verse tells us that back in the first century, God had promised "NOW" that He was going to shake not just the earth, but also heaven, and REMOVE those things which were made, so that only those things which could NOT be shaken would remain. Time relevant terms such as the word "NOW" cannot be swept under the carpet and disregarded. "NOW" applied to that first century generation when it was written - not to us.

The NHNE is NOT the ultimate eternal state for believers. God will do even better than that for us in the future. Isaiah's NHNE included death, childbirth, and prayers that would still be taking place, as well as having the presence of sinners. None of these things are going to be in the eternal state. Don't you realize that if there is "no marriage or giving in marriage" after the final resurrection, that would mean these children being born in the NHNE (as in Isaiah 65:23) would be bastard children born of fornication? Also, why would the believers even need to offer prayers to God in Isaiah 65:24's NHNE if they are face-to-face in His presence in the eternal state?

Once again you avoid the water-tight evidence and repeat what you have been wrongly taught.

 

[3 Resurrections]

• The second coming has not occurred.
• The glorification of the elect has not occurred.
• The end of the age has not occurred.
• The last day has not occurred.
• The old corrupt earth is still here.
• Creation has not been delivered from the bondage of corruption.
• The age to come has not arrived in all its perfect glory.
• The new heavens and new earth have not arrived.

This list you gave I presume is what you are referring to as your "water tight evidence", yes? If scripture teaches not a "second" coming in our future but a "third" coming instead, that renders all of this "evidence" above a moot point.

Paul mentioned in Ephesians 2:7 multiple "AGES that are coming" from his perspective on the timeline. We are currently sitting in one of those AGES that Paul wrote about, and we are currently anticipating the FINAL bodily coming of the Lord to this globe with a FINAL bodily resurrection and judgment for mankind. This does not even contradict the Nicene creed, which never uses the term "second" coming for what we are now anticipating for our future.

 

[sovereigngrace]

This list you gave I presume is what you are referring to as your "water tight evidence", yes? If scripture teaches not a "second" coming in our future but a "third" coming instead, that renders all of this "evidence" above a moot point.

Paul mentioned in Ephesians 2:7 multiple "AGES that are coming" from his perspective on the timeline. We are currently sitting in one of those AGES that Paul wrote about, and we are currently anticipating the FINAL bodily coming of the Lord to this globe with a FINAL bodily resurrection and judgment for mankind. This does not even contradict the Nicene creed, which never uses the term "second" coming for what we are now anticipating for our future.

I am not governed by the wording of Nicene creed. I go by Scripture. Heb 9:28 "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation."

This is talking about His next appearance. This is talking about Him coming for His people. It is talking about the the catching away.

 

[3 Resurrections]

I am not governed by the wording of Nicene creed. I go by Scripture. Heb 9:28 "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation."

This is talking about His next appearance. This is talking about Him coming for His people. It is talking about the the catching away.

You and I may not be governed by the wording of the Nicene creed, but this forum does have that as the terms of membership. I mentioned the Nicene creed not for you necessarily, but for any of the moderators who may be reading this.

I agree with everything you posted above. Christ was offered the one time, and there were those to whom Hebrews was written who were looking for that second bodily coming of Christ. That second coming in Hebrews 9:28 truly WAS Christ's next appearance coming to catch away all His resurrected believers and take them to heaven. But does the second coming mentioned in Hebrews 9:28 eliminate the possibility of a third coming? It says nothing either one way or another about a third coming of Christ, so that text cannot be used as a proof text that Christ would only come the second time, and never again after that.

Scripture says in John 4:54 that, "This is again the second miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judaea into Galilee." Does mentioning this as the "second" miracle mean that Jesus never performed another miracle after that one? If I showed you a picture and pointed out that this particular child is my second grandson, does that mean I haven't got a third grandson? You can't prove from that one statement alone that I either have or don't have a third grandson. You need more information than that.

Scripture does give us more information about the multiple comings of Christ. I skimmed over those texts for some 40 years as a believer without recognizing them until 12 years ago.

 

[DavidPT]

You and I may not be governed by the wording of the Nicene creed, but this forum does have that as the terms of membership. I mentioned the Nicene creed not for you necessarily, but for any of the moderators who may be reading this.

I agree with everything you posted above. Christ was offered the one time, and there were those to whom Hebrews was written who were looking for that second bodily coming of Christ. That second coming in Hebrews 9:28 truly WAS Christ's next appearance coming to catch away all His resurrected believers and take them to heaven. But does the second coming mentioned in Hebrews 9:28 eliminate the possibility of a third coming? It says nothing either one way or another about a third coming of Christ, so that text cannot be used as a proof text that Christ would only come the second time, and never again after that.

Scripture says in John 4:54 that, "This is again the second miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judaea into Galilee." Does mentioning this as the "second" miracle mean that Jesus never performed another miracle after that one? If I showed you a picture and pointed out that this particular child is my second grandson, does that mean I haven't got a third grandson? You can't prove from that one statement alone that I either have or don't have a third grandson. You need more information than that.

Scripture does give us more information about the multiple comings of Christ. I skimmed over those texts for some 40 years as a believer without recognizing them until 12 years ago.

What you need to do instead of the faulty reasoning you are using here, such as the example you used per Jesus' second miracle, is this.

Hebrews 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

You need to convincingly show how and why this part---and unto them that look for him, that it is not also applicable, for example, to anyone today. Because if it is applicable to anyone today, one then has to apply this to it as well, obviously---shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. How do you suppose you can get around that if this part---and unto them that look for him---is equally applicable to someone today?To deny that is to deny that anyone today or anyone during the past 2000 years through the present look for Him. That no one over the past 2000 years through the present look for Him, that only someone 2000 years ago looked for Him.

Take an atheist, for example, vs a Christian. Who would the following be applicable to in general----them that look for Him? Obviously, not the former, therefore, the latter. But, only 2000 years ago and not also during the past 2000 years through the present? Is that what we are to believe? Obviously, Hebrews 9:28 is meaning post His ascension since no one would be looking for Him to appear if He is already still here, meaning before He ascended.

What's ironic about you, and I think I mentioned this in the past. There was a time when you were involved in cults but eventually distanced yourself from them. But instead of learning from those mistakes, you in turn basically invent your own cult. Fortunately, you don't have any followers, though. At least none that I'm aware of unless you perhaps have some physically locally allowing you to be their guide and teacher.

 

[sovereigngrace]

You and I may not be governed by the wording of the Nicene creed, but this forum does have that as the terms of membership. I mentioned the Nicene creed not for you necessarily, but for any of the moderators who may be reading this.

I agree with everything you posted above. Christ was offered the one time, and there were those to whom Hebrews was written who were looking for that second bodily coming of Christ. That second coming in Hebrews 9:28 truly WAS Christ's next appearance coming to catch away all His resurrected believers and take them to heaven. But does the second coming mentioned in Hebrews 9:28 eliminate the possibility of a third coming? It says nothing either one way or another about a third coming of Christ, so that text cannot be used as a proof text that Christ would only come the second time, and never again after that.

Scripture says in John 4:54 that, "This is again the second miracle that Jesus did, when he was come out of Judaea into Galilee." Does mentioning this as the "second" miracle mean that Jesus never performed another miracle after that one? If I showed you a picture and pointed out that this particular child is my second grandson, does that mean I haven't got a third grandson? You can't prove from that one statement alone that I either have or don't have a third grandson. You need more information than that.

Scripture does give us more information about the multiple comings of Christ. I skimmed over those texts for some 40 years as a believer without recognizing them until 12 years ago.

1Ti 1:19-20: "Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme."

What was their great error?

2Ti 2:17-19: "And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity."

Like you, Hymenaeus and Philetus argued that the physical resurrection had already occurred. This was creating confusion with the Church. Confusion is not off the Lord, but the enemy. The fact is: the resurrection will occur at the second coming!

That is why Bible believing Christians reject Full Preterism as heresy!

 

[3 Resurrections]

You need to convincingly show how and why this part---and unto them that look for him, that it is not also applicable, for example, to anyone today. Because if it is applicable to anyone today, one then has to apply this to it as well, obviously---shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. How do you suppose you can get around that if this part---and unto them that look for him---is equally applicable to someone today?To deny that is to deny that anyone today or anyone during the past 2000 years through the present look for Him. That no one over the past 2000 years through the present look for Him, that only someone 2000 years ago looked for Him.

I don't deny that we today are looking forward to Christ's bodily return in our future. If you read carefully what I just wrote, I agreed that we today are ALSO looking for a bodily appearance of Christ at a final return with a resurrection and judgment. The assumption that most make is that Christ was going to stage ONE AND ONLY ONE judgment and resurrection event. This assumption cannot be proven from scripture. Indeed, the very words "FIRST resurrection" found in Revelation 20 show us without doubt that there is AT LEAST a second bodily resurrection event of the same nature.

Israel's OT agricultural harvest seasons of the year were timed to occur with the required attendance at the three harvest feast celebrations of Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles. Scripture frequently presents an agricultural harvest as a picture of the resurrection of the saints' bodies from out of the ground. In other words, would it be so unlikely that the OT Mosaic laws concerning attendance at those three required feast celebrations were portraying no less and no more than three bodily resurrection events occurring at those same particular times of the year? This isn't complicated. It would be simple enough for even a young child to see the connection.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Like you, Hymenaeus and Philetus argued that the physical resurrection had already occurred.

What I am proposing is NOT Full Preterism. Typically, a Full Preterist will deny any bodily resurrection expectation whatever for the believers. Of course, I don't need to tell you that this is incorrect.

Also, what I am proposing is NOT what Hymenaeus and Philetus taught. In their day, these two men were pointing to the physically-resurrected Matthew 27:52-53 saints (resurrected the same day as Christ) who were "seen of many" and were still present on earth in those days. Hymenaeus and Philetus were teaching that the past "First resurrection" of "Christ the First-fruits" and those other 144,000 resurrected First-fruits (from Matt. 27:52-53) composed the only physical resurrection event that the saints would ever experience. This led to an overthrow of the faith of some of those in the early church who believed this error the two men were teaching.

This erroneous teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus was the very reason why Paul wrote the comforting and encouraging 1 Thess. 4 passage about the coming rapture. This "catching away" would include both groups of those who had already been made alive and who had remained on the earth in those resurrected bodies (such as the Matt. 27:52-53 saints) as well as those whom Christ would raise from the dead at His coming. Together, both of these groups of resurrected saints would be caught away with Christ into heaven.

 

[Berean Tim]

The temple (representing the people of the Old Testament Congregation as stones of the buildings) was already destroyed along with Christ's death and He REBUILT it in three days where Christ is NOW a chief cornerstone with Elects of New Testament as builders of that building! The Pentecost came and the call for Great Commission was ALREADY given to the Church in 33AD. No need to wait for 70AD when you prefer to believe that the physical temple must fall to fit your flawed doctrine! Sigh! You totally missed the point Christ talked about!

I was asked about the physical Temple. I missed nothing

 

[Truth7t7]

Can you post the scripture where He said this?

Pretty hard to have a great tribulation in 70AD Jerusalem as reformed preterist eschatology falsely teaches, and Jesus returning immediately after this tribulation that we all know is a future event

The great tribulation and second coming are future events unfulfilled

Matthew 24:21-30KJV
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
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.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

 

[TribulationSigns]

I looked up 'great tribulation' in the scripture. It really only occurs in Matthew's gospel.

Matthew 24:19-21
But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! But pray that your flight will not be in the winter, or on a Sabbath. For then there will be a great tribulation.

Looks to me anyway, that Jesus is referring to the demolition of the temple and Jerusalem.

If Jesus was about to return, why would Jesus say 'But pray that your flight will not be in the winter, or on a Sabbath'. If it was the end of all things He would not say that.

Obviously, Jesus is talking about the judgement of Israel.

I reject your interpretation of the 'great tribulation' as a world wide event.

Try reading both Matthew 24 and Luke 21, there are two distinct end time events. One Israel and one the world.

All of you guys are wrong. This is not what Christ talked about! This has nothing to do with praying for a certain day of the week or season to flee physical Judea. No, no no... first you need to find exactly what Christ talked about the winter and sabbath.

Again, this all has to do with the New Testament congregation prior to Second Coming after all Elect are secured and salvation ended where Christ warned them not to come back into the church to find salvation for it has been gone.

Mat 24:17-21
(17) Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
(18) Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
(19) And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
(20) But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
(21) For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Winter in scripture is a time of hardship, deprivation, and storms where there is a lack of stores in the field. It is a time when all the harvest is done and there can be no more increase. A time when the work in the field has ended. Like the Sabbath, it signifies a time of rest, when the earth rests from its work.

Like the Sabbath in Matthew, it also symbolizes a time when salvation has ended on earth and there can be no more work in the field. There is no more fruits of the field to harvest. It is the time when no man can work to bring an increase.

Song of Solomon 2:11

• "For, lo, the winter is past, the rain is over and gone;"

Here God is illustrating that the rain of the winter storms is past. The time of privation and hardship is gone, and with summer comes flowers and new life. But winter preceding it is illustrated as tempest, storm, trouble, a time when life is dormant. That's why I believe Matthew 24 warns, "pray our flight be not in winter."

Jeremiah 8:20

• "The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved."

The point is, this is what CHRIST talked about. A period when time has run out for man to be delivered or saved because He has secured all Elect through the testimony of Two Witnesses, Revelation 7:1-4. So pray that man's flight from Judea (Church) is not at a time when salvation has ended and no man can work. Because if they are not saved then, all professed Christians (the ones who have not yet been sealed by God - Revelation 9:3-6) will be under judgment and the wrath of God.
That's it! It is not Judea, winter, and sabbath you thought should be understood literally. As I said, spiritual discernment and has everything to do with the spiritual condition of the New Testament congregation during the great tribulation prior to Second Coming. Not 70AD.

 

[Hammster]

Pretty hard to have a great tribulation in 70AD Jerusalem as reformed preterist eschatology falsely teaches, and Jesus returning immediately after this tribulation that we all know is a future event

The great tribulation and second coming are future events unfulfilled

Matthew 24:21-30KJV
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
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.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Happened first century.

 

[Truth7t7]

Happened first century.

That's what reformed preterist eschatology falsely teaches, they are wrong as you have clearly been shown

Please explain when Matthew 24:29-30 in the literal,, visible,, second coming seen below, took place in the first century?

Matthew 24:29-30KJV
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

 

[claninja]

No so. That is what you believe or have been taught but that is not what it says. Christ spoke about 2 events in Matthew 24. The disciples asked Him to explain those 2 events, and when they would happen. Christ answered those 2 questions about 2 events.

Many Bible students (including Preterists and Premillennialists) dive into Matthew 24 without recognizing the intro to Christ's comments in Matthew 23. There He talks about 2 events - AD70 and His climactic return at the end of time.

Jesus said in Matthew 23:37–39: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”

Jesus, first of all, speaks about the destruction of the temple in AD70, as a result of Israel's unbelief. He then talks about a future climactic day in the future when every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Here were two key events that would happen in the then future. The disciples were obviously inquisitive as to when these would happen. They then asked two questions in Matthew 24 in response to our Lord’s words. Matthew 24:3 records:

1. “Tell us, when shall these things be?”
2. “and what shall be the sign of thy coming (parousia), and of the end (sunteleías, meaning completion, or consummation) of the world (age)?”

This proves that the disciples were enquiring about the realization of these two aforementioned days. They wanted to know about their fulfillment. Sadly, Preterists and Premillennialists each ignore the other's events relating to the past and the future. Both are therefore missing the context and meaning. The context proves that Israel will be forced to cry "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord" at Christ's future "parousia," at "the end of the age.”

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. Jesus addresses the greatest event first. He talks about the trying events that will precede His glorious return, and then reassures: “But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.” This introductory part pertaining to the intra-Advent period relates to Matthew 24:4-14. Mark 13:5-13 and Luke 21:8-19 parallels.

Yes so. The definition of telos or syntéleia is NOT end of literal world. It means end or consummation, but what the “end” is must be determined from context. The context of the olivet discourse is set by Christ: not one stone will remain upon another.

If one understands that The OD passages are parallel then “the SIGN of your coming and end of the age” = “the SIGN when these things will be fulfilled”. Thus, The “end” = fulfillment of the destruction of the temple.

This is confirmed by the author of the epistle to the Hebrews claiming BOTH the old covenant practices were “near” to vanishing and Christ was coming in a little while without delay.

 

[Truth7t7]

Yes so. The definition of telos or syntéleia is NOT end of literal world. It means end or consummation, but what the “end” is must be determined from context. The context of the olivet discourse is set by Christ: not one stone will remain upon another.

If one understands that The OD passages are parallel then “the SIGN of your coming and end of the age” = “the SIGN when these things will be fulfilled”. Thus, The “end” = fulfillment of the destruction of the temple.

This is confirmed by the author of the epistle to the Hebrews claiming BOTH the old covenant practices were “near” to vanishing and Christ was coming in a little while without delay.

The consummation wasn't actually the end, but it was the temple destruction in 70AD Jerusalem that was the end, and we are living, breathing, and writing, presently about the end, that has already taken place as we await the end

Do you really believe you have sold that story to the reader?

 

[sovereigngrace]

Yes so. The definition of telos or syntéleia is NOT end of literal world. It means end or consummation, but what the “end” is must be determined from context. The context of the olivet discourse is set by Christ: not one stone will remain upon another.

If one understands that The OD passages are parallel then “the SIGN of your coming and end of the age” = “the SIGN when these things will be fulfilled”. Thus, The “end” = fulfillment of the destruction of the temple.

This is confirmed by the author of the epistle to the Hebrews claiming BOTH the old covenant practices were “near” to vanishing and Christ was coming in a little while without delay.

It is impossible communicating with you because you do not listen or address the counter arguments. That is why you refuse to budge when your views are exposed. It is a pointless endeavor.

My last post rebuts this.

 

[Hammster]

That's what reformed preterist eschatology falsely teaches, they are wrong as you have clearly been shown

Please explain when Matthew 24:29-30 in the literal,, visible,, second coming seen below, took place in the first century?

Matthew 24:29-30KJV
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

You’ve made the claim that it’s a literal, visible second coming. That’s eisegesis. You have to understand the Old Testament imagery that Jesus used, and that His audience would be familiar with. Coming on the clouds is judgement language. See, for instance, Isaiah 19:1.

And then, to top it off, we have this:

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
— Matthew 24:34

So we know this all has to happen within 40 years of Jesus stating this.