preterism

[parousia70]

Then show me how 70 AD exceeded the destruction and impact of the flood, the atomic bomb, the holocaust of the Jews in WWII.....

OK, For the 3rd time in this thread, I will show you just that:

AD 66-70 was the greatest Day-of-the-Lord event in Israel's history, and was, unquestionably, the one Christ's followers spoke of mere decades before it transpired. This was the same Day of the Lord concerning which the apostles stated they would remain alive unto its passing (1 Thess 5:2-4,23; Phil 1:6,10; Heb 10:25,36-39; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 1 Cor 5:5).

Due to the covenantal significance of the event, that Day of the Lord's vengeance (cf. Luke 21:20-22; Isa 61:2; Jer 46:10) can never be repeated.

Did you catch that Tom ole' fella?

Due to the COVENENTAL SIGNIFICANCE of the event, that Day of the Lord's vengeance (cf. Luke 21:20-22; Isa 61:2; Jer 46:10) CAN NEVER BE REPEATED.


--THEREFORE--

There is no equal to the level of devastation millions of Messiah-rejecting Jews endured as they were violently excommunicated out of covenant with God (Matt 21:40-45; Acts 3:22-24).

Did you get that Tom old boy?

THERE IS NO EQUAL to the level of devastation millions of Messiah-rejecting Jews endured as they were violently excommunicated out of covenant with God (Matt 21:40-45; Acts 3:22-24).

Without question, Jesus promised his apostles that they would live to see Israel's great tribulation ("great distress in the land and wrath upon this people") and all those things come to pass in their generation (Matt 24:33-34; Luke 21:31-32).


Tom, once again, until you provide a lucid refutation of the above, you remain hopelessly unsubstabntiated in your hollywood fantasyland interpratation of the great tribulation.

It' remains high time time you accept the BIBLICAL interpratation, and reject the inventions of men.

 

[Justme]

Hi Toms, et al,


So in this great flood that killed all but eight humans and a ship full of animals.......well it must have drowned all the trees and plants too come to think of it, but who cares. With this 8 survivors do you consider that to be just a tad more devastating than a fight that only covered a few square miles in old time Judea?

Justme

 

[Toms777]

Hi Toms, et al,


So in this great flood that killed all but eight humans and a ship full of animals.......well it must have drowned all the trees and plants too come to think of it, but who cares. With this 8 survivors do you consider that to be just a tad more devastating than a fight that only covered a few square miles in old time Judea?

Justme

I have made my view clear - what about you? Do you consider a small battle around Jerusalem a more major catastrophe than the flood? the Atomic bomb? The holocaust of the Jews in WWII?

 

[Toms777]

The only problem is that Jesus didn't tell you to look for the signs!

Really? Several times he speaks of seeing the signs, for example:

Luke 21:20-21
20 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near.
NKJV

Luke 21:26-27
27 Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
NKJV

Luke 21:29-31
29 Then He spoke to them a parable: "Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. 30 When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.
NKJV

 

[stauron]

Jesus told us that this was how we were to judge it - don't you think that he knew how we would look at it? Do you think that he told us what to look for and then meant something else to confuse us?

I am sure the disciples had the same conversation. "Jesus told us to look for the signs, He didn't tell us one thing and mean something else to confuse us did He?" And Toms777's answer is YES! They looked for the signs, and, using Toms777's interpretation, didn't find out until they were consumed that they meant something else.

Then show me how 70 AD exceeded the destruction and impact of the flood, the atomic bomb, the holocaust of the Jews in WWII.....

Could you please address the context that I have provided about the "worst ever"? Matt 21-24 are all dealing with the same subject, the brood of vipers, the children of the devil, the synagogue of satan, that thought they were God's people but were really faithless covenant breakers. God took the kingdom from them and gave it to another. That generation thought they were the apple of God's eye and God called them faithless and adulterers and killed them for it, that is GREAT TRIBULATION. Suffering for a lie that they told to themselves.Please, oh please, address this. You have continued to ignore this for weeks now. Your definitions and interpretation of these verses is wrong. You are bringing your theology and laying it on top of the text.

Still waiting.

 

[stauron]

Hank Hanegraaff (the Bible Answer Man) is not a preterist and considers consistent preterism outside of orthodoxy. I think that he is only a partial futurist, though.

He had a great program on Monday. I only listened to part of it, but he equated Grant Jeffrey and the Trinity Broadcasting Network (and several others as well) to a "Christian psychic network" and criticized them severly for their many and repeted false "prophesies". He then says that use of scripture is eisogesis and "newspaper eschatology that continues to go from bad to worse". You can listen to the broadcast at: http://www.oneplace.com/Ministries/bible_answer_man/Archives.asp

Monday January 5th is the one, the part about Grant Jeffrey is just before the 25 minute mark in the program.

I am posting this in regards to those who think that preterists are out of line or being unfair when we say that there are many futurists who continue to make unfounded "prophecy" about the end times and set dates again and again and again and again and never learn. Here is a fairly well respected and for our purposes unbiased source documenting one of the troubles with futurism.

 

[parousia70]

[/size][/font]

Really? Several times he speaks of [Toms777] seeing the signs, for example:

Luke 21:20-21
20 "But when [Toms777] sees Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then [Toms777] will know that its desolation is near.
NKJV

Luke 21:26-27
27 Then [Toms777] will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
NKJV

Luke 21:29-31
29 Then He spoke to [Toms777] a parable: "Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. 30 When they are already budding, [Toms777], see and know for [Toms777] that summer is now near. 31 So [Toms777] also, when you, [Toms777], see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.
NKJV

Sorry, But I do not accept your [Toms777] rewrite of sctipure.

 

[parousia70]

Do you consider a small battle around Jerusalem a more major catastrophe than the flood? the Atomic bomb? The holocaust of the Jews in WWII?

Covenentally speaking, yes, without question that "small battle" that lasted 3.5 years and consumed an entire Nation was a the greatest catastrophy that had ever or could ever befall the Jews.

It's impact can never be, nor has ever been, repeated, equalled or surpassed.

None of the events you listed carried with it the eternal ramifications of AD70. It was the worst that ever was nor ever shall be.

Case closed.

 

[Suede]

Toms777,

Suede "The only problem is that Jesus didn't tell you to look for the signs!"

++++Really? Several times he speaks of seeing the signs, for example:
Luke 21:20-2120 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near.
Luke 21:26-27Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
Luke 21:29-31Then He spoke to them a parable: "Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. 30 When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.+++

Yea, and none of those verses are directed towards you, they are exclusively to the disciples.

SUEDE

 

[Toms777]

Sorry, But I do not accept your [Toms777] rewrite of sctipure.

It was you who re-wrote scripture, not I.

 

[Toms777]

Toms777,

Suede "The only problem is that Jesus didn't tell you to look for the signs!"

++++Really? Several times he speaks of seeing the signs, for example:
Luke 21:20-2120 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near.
Luke 21:26-27Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
Luke 21:29-31Then He spoke to them a parable: "Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. 30 When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near.+++

Yea, and none of those verses are directed towards you, they are exclusively to the disciples.

SUEDE

You keep saying that, but you don't show me that to be the case from scripture. Indeed, let's see:

Matt 24:19-20
But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath.
NKJV

So which of the apostles were pregnant - it does say "you" and you said that this was exclsuive to the apostles!

 

[Toms777]

Covenentally speaking, yes, without question that "small battle" that lasted 3.5 years and consumed an entire Nation was a the greatest catastrophy that had ever or could ever befall the Jews.

It's impact can never be, nor has ever been, repeated, equalled or surpassed.

None of the events you listed carried with it the eternal ramifications of AD70. It was the worst that ever was nor ever shall be.

Case closed.

The second world war lasted 7 years - and many wars lasted longer. Certainly the holocaust during which 10's of millions died and which encompassed every corner of the earth, not just one world would exceed that.

It is *you* who claim eternal ramifications, but that is not found in scripture. What are these *eternal famifications*.

 

[parousia70]

You keep saying that, but you don't show me that to be the case from scripture. Indeed, let's see:

Matt 24:19-20
But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath.
NKJV

So which of the apostles were pregnant - it does say "you" and you said that this was exclsuive to the apostles!

Jesus makes the distinction.

He didn't say to the apostles "Woe to you who are pregnant or nursing", he said "woe to those". He did say "Pray YOUR flight not be in winter" to the apostles.

This is so clearly first century stuff. It was for the apostles and their contemporaries.

You view EXCLUDES the apostles.
No matter how many other folks Jesus meant to INCLUDE in this warning, He never EXCLUDES the apostles. You need Him to, but He never does.

Please show Where Jesus excludes the apostles from witnessing the fulfillment of these passages.

 

[parousia70]

The second world war lasted 7 years - and many wars lasted longer. Certainly the holocaust during which 10's of millions died and which encompassed every corner of the earth, not just one world would exceed that.

Mr. Body Count strikes again.

It is *you* who claim eternal ramifications, but that is not found in scripture. What are these *eternal famifications*.

What should I understand you to mean when you say "it's *you* who claim eternal ramifications"?

When you say to me *you*, do you mean not me personally, but someone who will be alive in 2000 years?

As to the eternal ramifications, I spelled them out to you at least 3 times before, so I doubt it will do any good to do it again, but what the heck, I have all the time in the world:

THERE IS NO EQUAL to the level of devastation millions of Messiah-rejecting Jews endured as they were violently excommunicated out of covenant with God (Matt 21:40-45; Acts 3:22-24).


Can't get more ETERNAL than excommunication out of covenant with God.

WW2 Didn't excommunicate Jews from covenant with God. Not even close.

Hiroshima didn't excommunicate Jews from covenant realtionship with God.
Not Hardly.

Nothing before or since has or can equal the eternal removal of the Jews as Gods Chosen people.

 

[parousia70]

It was you who re-wrote scripture, not I.

It's you (and by you I mean the LITERAL sense, as in you toms777, not some other fella who won't be born for another 2000 years)...

It's you Toms777 who believes when Jesus told His apostles "When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies" that Jesus actually meant "Toms777" and not His apostles.

The rewrite is yours Toms777, not mine. I believe Jesus meant what He said.

 

[Toms777]

Jesus makes the distinction.

He didn't say to the apostles "Woe to you who are pregnant or nursing", he said "woe to those". He did say "Pray YOUR flight not be in winter" to the apostles.

This is so clearly first century stuff. It was for the apostles and their contemporaries.

You view EXCLUDES the apostles.
No matter how many other folks Jesus meant to INCLUDE in this warning, He never EXCLUDES the apostles. You need Him to, but He never does.

Please show Where Jesus excludes the apostles from witnessing the fulfillment of these passages.

He refers to "your" flight" in the next line, and if "your" m,ust refer to those to whom he was speaking, then at least one of them must have been preganant during the 70AD timeframe.

 

[Toms777]

It's you (and by you I mean the LITERAL sense, as in you toms777, not some other fella who won't be born for another 2000 years)...

It's you Toms777 who believes when Jesus told His apostles "When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies" that Jesus actually meant "Toms777" and not His apostles.

The rewrite is yours Toms777, not mine. I believe Jesus meant what He said.

Which apostle was pregnant?

Matt 24:19-20
19 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20 And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath.
NKJV

 

[Toms777]

Mr. Body Count strikes again.


What should I understand you to mean when you say "it's *you* who claim eternal ramifications"?

When you say to me *you*, do you mean not me personally, but someone who will be alive in 2000 years?

As to the eternal ramifications, I spelled them out to you at least 3 times before, so I doubt it will do any good to do it again, but what the heck, I have all the time in the world:

THERE IS NO EQUAL to the level of devastation millions of Messiah-rejecting Jews endured as they were violently excommunicated out of covenant with God (Matt 21:40-45; Acts 3:22-24).

Funny but Paul disagrees with you:


Rom 11:1-5
11:1 I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, 3 "LORD, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life"? 4 But what does the divine response say to him? "I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal." 5 Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
NKJV

Paul wanrs against those who believe the hersesy of replacement theology as follows:

Rom 11:17-22
17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, 18 do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, "Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in." 20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either.
NKJV

So no, your argument does not hold. they were no more rejected by God than the gentiles who actually murdered Jesus.

 

[stauron]

Funny but Paul disagrees with you:


Rom 11:1-5
11:1 I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, 3 "LORD, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life"? 4 But what does the divine response say to him? "I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal." 5 Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
NKJV

Paul wanrs against those who believe the hersesy of replacement theology as follows:

Rom 11:17-22
17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, 18 do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, "Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in." 20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either.
NKJV

So no, your argument does not hold. they were no more rejected by God than the gentiles who actually murdered Jesus.

So finally we come to the real point of contention. No wonder you won't reply to my post. You don't believe that God divorced Israel and slew her in covenant judgement.

You must not have read Acts 3 that P70 quoted:

3:23 Every person who does not obey that prophet will be destroyed and thus removed from the people.’ 3:24 And all the prophets, from Samuel and those who followed him, have spoken about and announced these days. 3:25 You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant that God made with your ancestors, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your descendants all the nations of the earth will be blessed.’ 3:26 God raised up his servant and sent him first to you, to bless you by turning each one of you from your iniquities.”

The Old Covenant was the matrimony between God and His people. They proved faithless, stiff-necked, rebellious murderers. They also proved that the Old Covenant was not sufficient to meet the needs of the human condition.

I am not sure what you mean by "replacement theology". If you mean that the Old Covenant has been replaced by the New Covenant then I guess I am a heretic by your reckoning. But I agree with Paul that the remnent (7000 who didn't bow to Baal) joined the New Covenant because they recognised their Messiah and the rest were judged. No replacement, the faithful Jews accepted Christ and with great joy saw the Hope of Israel fulfilled in Him, just as Paul said "at the present time" in Paul's day.

God judged the rest for their reckless ways and married another. The ones with the faith of Abraham (the 7000 elect that you quote) partook of the New Covenant. Now all with the faith of Abraham are members of the New Covenant, Christ's Body where there is no Jew or Greek, slave or free but a new creation.

So, the remnent was not rejected, but the harlot was. Why did Paul use himself as an example that God had not rejected Israel? How would that make any difference? It was because some of the Jews (the righteous remnent) became Christians.

Here is the question you need to answer: What was Paul doing that made his fellow countrymen jealous so that some of them were saved?

 

[armothe]

He refers to "your" flight" in the next line, and if "your" m,ust refer to those to whom he was speaking, then at least one of them must have been preganant during the 70AD timeframe.

those does not equal you.

You know......It is possible for a person to be speaking directly to another person/s, and reference people who are outside of the conversation.

It's not all that uncommon, you know.

-A