Preterism misrepresents Scripture

[trophy33]

Are you purposely avodiing addressing my point?

Take also into consideration that I am not a native English speaker and maybe some nuance is lost because of this barrier.

Try to ask more simply and shortly (without inserting plenty of "why dont you want to answer this" between the sentences) or maybe try to rework the question into a formal logic structure/steps.

Does Revelation indicate that everything in the book was soon to happen or not? It does not, right? It says in Revelation 1:19 that John was to write about things that happened in the past, things happening at the time, and things that would happen after that. Why is it that you don't want to address this?

I do not understand what you want of me.

I think the Revelation is about past events from our perspective, but for John it was about past events, present events and future events. The future events were to happen soon, as the verses say.

I said 70 as the low end of the ages that the ones Jesus was speaking to likely would have been in AD 70 if they were still alive. Most of them probably would've been 80 or more by AD 70.

There is no biological problem with people living to 80´s, 90's and more, if they are healthy and survive wars, famines etc, so I do not see what more to talk about, here.

I was referring to the word "tachy" that is translated as "quickly" in particular and not to every word that is translated as "near" or "soon". That particular word is always used in the sense of something happening immediately or very quickly. It seems that you are denying that, but all you need to do is look at how it is used elsewhere.
https://biblia.com/bible/nkjv/2 Pet 3.9

Its not just a word, its also a sentence and the context, what determine meanings.

Regarding the vocabulary you frequently use - "doctrine, deny, confirm". I have no such strong positions regarding eschatology. I am arguing for the simplest explanation of the text, thats all.

This is an interesting thing for a preterist like yourself to say. Your whole doctrine is based on assumptions you make about how words like "soon" and "near" are used, yet here you are saying there is no law about how they have to be used in any given verse. Very interesting indeed.

Its not just a word, its also a sentence and the context, what determine meanings.

Speaking of exaggerating...you are exaggerating how many prophecies that supposedly say that the coming would happen in their lifetimes. There weren't 30. There were none.

Well, you try to explain them in a different way, but that does not mean they are not there.

 

[grafted branch]

I hope someone else here understands this. I do not know what you are meaning here.

Spiritual Jew asked how Isaiah 65:17 can be understood in a non-literal way. If Spiritual Jew can understand how the words of Genesis 1:1 will be in NHNE then he should also be able to understand how Isaiah 65:17 is meant in a non-literal way.

It appears to me that unless someone, somehow, can’t read or understand Gods word when they enter into the NHNE then everyone’s view of Isaiah 65:17 should be understood in a non-literal way, don’t you think?

 

[grafted branch]

I wish this site would put in a tag in this area of the forum that says “Full preterist allowed”, a tag like the “Futurist only”, “Pre-trib only” and “A-mil only” tags.

This would allow a thread like this one to get an unrestricted preterist view to be fully debated. I always feel like the preterist have to argue with one hand tied behind their back in this area of the forum.

 

[Ed Parenteau]

Not so. What you propose conflicts with all the biblical writers. I refer you back.

God was perfectly able to tell us in the Old Testament if something was in the distant future, so what's changed? Numbers 24:15-19, Daniel 8:26, 2 Samuel 7:19, and many more times.

Then in
Ezekiel 7about 5 years before the siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar begins.)
7Doom has come to you,
O inhabitants of the land.
The time has come;
the day is near;
there is panic on the mountains
instead of shouts of joy.
8Very soon I will pour out My wrath upon you
and vent My anger against you;

And then God's reaction to the Jews for not believing His time statements.
Ezekiel 12about 4 years before siege of Jerusalem begins.
21Again the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 22“Son of man, what is this proverb that you have in the land of Israel:

‘The days go by,
and every vision fails’?

23Therefore tell them that this is what the Lord GOD says: ‘I will put an end to this proverb, and in Israel they will no longer recite it.’

But say to them: ‘The days are at hand when every vision will be fulfilled. 24For there will be no more false visions or flattering divinations within the house of Israel, 25because I, the LORD, will speak whatever word I speak, and it will be fulfilled without delay. For in your days, O rebellious house, I will speak a message and bring it to pass, declares the Lord GOD.’ ”

26Furthermore, the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 27“Son of man, take note that the house of Israel is saying, ‘The vision that he sees is for many years from now; he prophesies about the distant future.’

28Therefore tell them that this is what the Lord GOD says: ‘None of My words will be delayed any longer. The message I speak will be fulfilled, declares the Lord GOD.’ ”

 

[DavidPT]

I’ll take a shot at this question.
First off Luke 21:33 says Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. Which means Isaiah 65:17 can’t be referring to anything written in the Bible.

If we are currently in NHNE then the former heaven and earth (literal or not) can’t be remembered and there’s no possible way to figure out what the former heaven and earth was because it won’t come to mind.

If we aren’t in NHNE yet, then nothing that is currently written in the Bible can be referring to the current heaven and earth because the words of the Bible will be in the NHNE according to Luke 21:33 and according to Isaiah 65:17 the former shall not be remembered.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Will this literal statement be remembered in NHNE?

Here is something else for your brain to chew on while you are at it.

Isaiah 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Isaiah 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

Obviously, what they are doing per verse 24 involves something that took place during the former earth, since it is during that era of time that the ones meant here transgressed against the Lord. And if it is during the time of the new heavens and the new earth that they are doing what they are doing in verse 24, obviously then, the former is still being remembered, it is still coming to mind. Yet, Isaiah 65:17 records, that during the time of the new heavens and a new earth, the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Are these two passages contradicting each other then?

 

[grafted branch]

Here is something else for your brain to chew on while you are at it.

Isaiah 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Isaiah 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

Obviously, what they are doing per verse 24 involves something that took place during the former earth, since it is during that era of time that the ones meant here transgressed against the Lord. And if it is during the time of the new heavens and the new earth that they are doing what they are doing in verse 24, obviously then, the former is still being remembered, it is still coming to mind. Yet, Isaiah 65:17 records, that during the time of the new heavens and a new earth, the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Are these two passages contradicting each other then?

Thanks for pointing this out. Maybe what isn’t remembered or come to mind is the elements in 2 Peter 3:10 that melt with fervent heat.

Meaning whenever the NHNE happens there will be no possible way to know what the elements were that melted.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I wish this site would put in a tag in this area of the forum that says “Full preterist allowed”, a tag like the “Futurist only”, “Pre-trib only” and “A-mil only” tags.

This would allow a thread like this one to get an unrestricted preterist view to be fully debated. I always feel like the preterist have to argue with one hand tied behind their back in this area of the forum.

Heresy should not be allowed on a Christian site.

 

[grafted branch]

Heresy should not be allowed on a Christian site.

Well, at one time it was heresy to say the earth is round.

I’m personally not full preterist but what I don’t understand is why full preterism is any more heretic that full futurism.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Well, at one time it was heresy to say the earth is round.

I’m personally not full preterist but what I don’t understand is why full preterism is any more heretic that full futurism.

I know you do not. That is part of the problem. It is because they deny the literal physical visible return of Christ. Hello!

 

[grafted branch]

I know you do not. That is part of the problem. It is because they deny the literal physical visible return of Christ. Hello!

Wouldn’t it be just as much a heresy to say that the prophecy of Jerusalem being surrounded by armies wasn’t fulfilled and would never be literally fulfilled?

I can create a thread about this without having to go to the controversy board but if I create a thread about Christ coming in 70 AD then it’s heresy and I have to go to the controversial board.

I guess what I don’t understand is those who decided what is heresy and what wasn’t in the church history were clearly wrong on some things like the earth is flat and why the ultimate metric of determining what is heresy and what isn’t can’t just be the scriptures themselves.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Wouldn’t it be just as much a heresy to say that the prophecy of Jerusalem being surrounded by armies wasn’t fulfilled and would never be literally fulfilled?

I can create a thread about this without having to go to the controversy board but if I create a thread about Christ coming in 70 AD then it’s heresy and I have to go to the controversial board.

I guess what I don’t understand is those who decided what is heresy and what wasn’t in the church history were clearly wrong on some things like the earth is flat and why the ultimate metric of determining what is heresy and what isn’t can’t just be the scriptures themselves.

Who is denying AD70 occurred? You are not getting it!

 

[Spiritual Jew]

This is what I mean by using the verse from Peter as a blank check for other verses elsewhere. And Peter is not saying that it will take thousands of years, anyway.

I never said that he said it WILL take thousands of years, I said he indicated that it COULD take thousands of years because that was entirely up to the Lord and no amount of time (thousands of years or even much more) that it would take could be considered slow from His eternal perspective. If you're just going to misrepresent what I say, then there's no point in continuing the discussion.

 

[grafted branch]

Who is denying AD70 occurred? You are not getting it!

I do get it, the Nicene creed says there is a future literal coming and this forum will say any view that denies a future coming is heresy.

If I wanted to deny 70AD occurred I could do so and that would not be heresy even though both denying 70AD and a future coming of Christ are denying literal fulfillments.

I just simply made a suggestion that a red tag could be made available to allow full preterist to argue against some of your statements like this in the OP …

If you notice when you engage with them, most never want to talk about Jesus' glorious future return in majesty and glory to introduce everlasting perfection, righteousness and justice on the new earth. That is because many do not even believe in a future second coming.

Only full preterist don’t believe in a future coming, it seems you wanted from the start to debate full preterist but only partial preterist views are allowed in this area of the forum so really nobody is going to argue against that point. I think it would be helpful if full preterist could debate someone like you in this area of the forum but they have their hands tied behind their backs, so to speak.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Take also into consideration that I am not a native English speaker and maybe some nuance is lost because of this barrier.

I was not aware of this. But, it does explain why you seem to interpret things very literally (in your view "near" and similar words always mean literally near from man's perspective and can't possibly mean anything else), which I would assume is typical when it's not your primary language? I've noticed that before of others who do not have Engish as their primary language.

Try to ask more simply and shortly (without inserting plenty of "why dont you want to answer this" between the sentences) or maybe try to rework the question into a formal logic structure/steps.

No offense, but I don't feel like catering to the fact that English isn't your native language. It's just too much work for us to have a decent discussion where we understand each other, so I'd rather just say thanks for the discussion and just agree to disagree at this point.

There is no biological problem with people living to 80´s, 90's and more, if they are healthy and survive wars, famines etc, so I do not see what more to talk about, here.

We weren't talking about people today, we were talking about people in the first century. I don't believe many people lived that long in those days.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I wish this site would put in a tag in this area of the forum that says “Full preterist allowed”, a tag like the “Futurist only”, “Pre-trib only” and “A-mil only” tags.

This would allow a thread like this one to get an unrestricted preterist view to be fully debated. I always feel like the preterist have to argue with one hand tied behind their back in this area of the forum.

Why in the world would you want to allow full preterists to post here? They deny the future glorious bodily return of Jesus Christ and the future resurrection of the dead. They are not welcome on a Christian forum when they deny fundamental Christian truths like that.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I’ll take a shot at this question.
First off Luke 21:33 says Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. Which means Isaiah 65:17 can’t be referring to anything written in the Bible.

You already lost me. Why are you saying this exactly?

If we are currently in NHNE then the former heaven and earth (literal or not) can’t be remembered and there’s no possible way to figure out what the former heaven and earth was because it won’t come to mind.

We're not currently in the NHNE. Where are you getting that idea from?

If we aren’t in NHNE yet, then nothing that is currently written in the Bible can be referring to the current heaven and earth because the words of the Bible will be in the NHNE according to Luke 21:33 and according to Isaiah 65:17 the former shall not be remembered.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Will this literal statement be remembered in NHNE?

Ah, I see what you're saying now. You're wondering how the current heaven and earth would not be remembered if Jesus's words never pass away.

The former is obviously referring to the current heavens and earth which will not be remembered. They will not be remembered after they are burned up when Jesus returns (2 Peter 3:10-13).

When Jesus said His words won't pass away He meant what His words represented and taught will never pass away. The eternal truths of His words will never pass away. Such as His teaching about the two greatest commandments being to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind and to love your neighbor as yourself. Those are things that will go on for eternity. We will continue to love God and love people for eternity. That's all Jesus was saying. But, the current earth as we know it with all its sin and death and such? It won't be remembered on the eternal new earth that will be free of sin, death, pain, crying and sorrow (Rev 21:4).

 

[DavidPT]

If I wanted to deny 70AD occurred I could do so and that would not be heresy even though both denying 70AD and a future coming of Christ are denying literal fulfillments.

You are using some bizarre comparisons here in order to try and make the point you are attempting to make. What would be the point of anyone, no matter who they are, denying that 70 AD happened? I have never heard of one single person ever denying that. Even unbelieving Jews alive today don't deny that that happened. You're not making sense here since you are providing a scenario that isn't even reasonable, as if anyone, no matter who they are, have a valid reason to deny that 70 AD happened.

Maybe you are conflating the interpretation of certain passages to mean that the interpreter is denying that 70 AD ever happened, if, for example, the coming recorded in Matthew 24:30, that the interpreter insists it is not involving 70 AD but is involving a coming in the end of this age. How is that denying that 70 AD happened? Just because what some interpreters don't take to be involving 70 AD, while other interpreters do, that is hardly meaning the former are denying 70 AD ever happened.

That works both ways. Just because what some interpreters don't take to be involving the 2nd coming in the end of this age, while other interpreters do, that is hardly meaning the former are then denying that a coming in the end of this age is going to happen. Unless, I guess, that if they are full Preterists. To be honest, I don't even understand full Preterism to begin with. What do they assume is going to happen eventually? Nothing? That the world will simply continue to involve life and death forever?

 

[grafted branch]

Why in the world would you want to allow full preterists to post here? They deny the future glorious bodily return of Jesus Christ and the future resurrection of the dead. They are not welcome on a Christian forum when they deny fundamental Christian truths like that.

If the truth they are denying is fundamental, then it should be extremely easy to disprove the position of those who deny it.

All I suggested was that they be allowed to give their position, currently they can’t and I don’t think this website would allow them free rein through out the forum but Sovereigngrace seemed to be arguing against them. I just thought if Sovereigngrace wanted to show the rest of us how easy it is to defeat the full preterist view, it would be helpful to allow the full preterist to post to this thread if this website would made it possible for the author to specifically allow it.

That is all I was thinking, I didn’t put in a formal suggestion. But based on how much it seems to bother the Amil people here I doubt it would happen anyway.

 

[grafted branch]

But, the current earth as we know it with all its sin and death and such? It won't be remembered on the eternal new earth that will be free of sin, death, pain, crying and sorrow (Rev 21:4).

Will people in NHNE be able to understand why Jesus died if we don’t remember the sins we committed? Will it not come to our minds the pain and death Jesus suffered? These things happen in this current heaven and earth.

 

[grafted branch]

I don't even understand full Preterism to begin with. What do they assume is going to happen eventually? Nothing? That the world will simply continue to involve life and death forever?

I don’t know that much about them either, I think they see statements like “ a great multitude that no man can number “ as meaning this earth never ends and people keep dying and going to heaven. I suppose I should do a search and read up on their views but I find it easier to just talk to people on a forum like this one.