preterism

[Justme]

Hi Toms,
Okay let's just stick to one.. This is from Justme's post.

This would be to explain one of the signs. The sign that the parousia was part of the answer that Jesus gave to this question.
4"Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?"
************************************
Then Toms wrote this:
Now don't try to move on until we have at leats resolved one item. I am having such a hard time to try to get the preterists on here to address a single point before they want to move onto to another one.
*************************************
So here you go...........................

Mark recorded the question exactly as Luke did.

7"Teacher," they asked, "when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?"

Matthew recorded the question as:
"Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"

All three of these recorded questions are in response to a single statement which all three recorded with exactly the same meaning.
2"Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

The response by Jesus, recorded by all three are alike in these key instances.

Flee from Judea.............
great tribulation..........
coming of the son of man.............

All three writers can be correct as written, if the 'end' and the 'coming' are SIGNS of the destruction of the temple.

Is there any other verses that would agree with that interpretation? Yes....
Mark 13
30I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

26Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

You can realize that if the 'coming', the 'end' and the great tribulation(destruction of temple and the wrath against the people of Jerusalem) is past then great portions of Revelation takes place in the spiritual or heavenly or the invisible to mortal realm. Therefore, pointing out ANY scripture related to that realm and saying "it never happened" is a non- argument. Not finding any physical, historical evidence would be totally understandable, there isn't any tangible evidence. That's why it is called faith.

So the bottom line is this, if the 'this generation' was a generation in the first century, I am biblically correct in this interpretation, no questions asked. Show me scripture to prove I'm wrong. AND remember "it didn't happen" isn't a suitable argument against a spiritual, heavenly, invisible eternal event.

Also remember:
2 Cor 4:18
So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

Justme

 

[Toms777]

Actually it doesn’t, it’s called non falsifiability, which means I cannot prove it to be wrong.

Then you can neither prove anything by asking me to prove that an event did not happen. the only way to prove something is to show eveidence that it did happen.

Please show me where human life came close to extinstion in 70AD.

 

[Toms777]

Hi Toms,
Okay let's just stick to one.. This is from Justme's post.

We have been through this one and I already said one item at a time - you are trying to add one more. I told you that I don't have the time to get into multiple arguments on here, and I made the same mistake earlier which ended up in several page long posts.

I would ask you to respect my request. If not, then I may choose to ignore. I have said that a number of times now. If we can deal with each item and come to closure, this will be far more effective. This does not in any way suggest that I intend to stop you from debating other points with other people, but I am going to be focused.

I will be willing to move one once we can agree that the human race did not come to the brink of extinction in 70AD.

 

[Justme]

Hi Toms,

I will be willing to move one once we can agree that the human race did not come to the brink of extinction in 70AD.

We do agree on that so now to my post???????????

Justme

 

[Suede]

Toms777



+++Then you can neither prove anything by asking me to prove that an event did not happen. the only way to prove something is to show eveidence that it did happen.+++



You missed the point, yet again. Space aliens coming to earth have non falsifiability because it involves outerspace for one. I cannot through emprical means disprove this. HOWEVER, we can reason that it is unlikely.



70 AD can be proven emprically, historically and scripturally. Therefore, you do have material to work with to disprove it. The fact is you can't though. Futurism isn't up to the task do to it's incorrect doctrine.

+++Please show me where human life came close to extinstion in 70AD+++



Again assumption. Please show me scripturally where the whole Kosmos was at threat? Also, while you are at it, show me scripturally where all this is to take place outside the first century.
Time has come to put up or shut up.


SUEDE

 

[Toms777]

You missed the point, yet again. Space aliens coming to earth have non falsifiability because it involves outerspace for one. I cannot through emprical means disprove this. HOWEVER, we can reason that it is unlikely.

70 AD can be proven emprically, historically and scripturally. Therefore, you do have material to work with to disprove it. The fact is you can't though. Futurism isn't up to the task do to it's incorrect doctrine.

Circular reasoning. You say that taking the Bible at face value is wrong (your assumption) therefore we are wrong to do so.

It would bother me if I had to exoplain away everything as invisible, symbolic and petioc simply because there is not historical evidence.

Again assumption. Please show me scripturally where the whole Kosmos was at threat? Also, while you are at it, show me scripturally where all this is to take place outside the first century.
Time has come to put up or shut up.

The Bible has been quoted numerous times in this regard.

Matt 24:22
22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
NKJV

Now show us the historical evidence that this happened.

the time has come to "put up or shut up", as you so nicely put it!

 

[Toms777]

Hi Toms,


We do agree on that so now to my post???????????

Justme

Let me get this straight, you agree that there is no historical evidence that mankind was brought close to extinction in 70AD and therefore Matt 24:22 was not fulfilled in 70AD.

Please confirm that we agree.

 

[Suede]

Toms777


+++Circular reasoning. You say that taking the Bible at face value is wrong (your assumption) therefore we are wrong to do so.+++


Huh? I’m a Preterist, I take more of the Bible at face value then you do, I promise. You probably think that when Jesus said the present generation would not pass, that he meant the Jewish race, don’t ya? Of course you do, you have to! I understand generation to mean what it means, 40 years. Care to comment on the word Generation?



+++The Bible has been quoted numerous times in this regard.

Matt 24:22
22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.

Now show us the historical evidence that this happened.+++



Parousia70 has already covered this, and I back him fully. I’ve been following this dialog. For one that says their time is precious, you sure do like to rehash items.



Now, in regards to literal verses care to put forth a literal view of these???



"This generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” (Mk. 13:30)



“The end of all things is at hand; therefore, be of sound judgment and sober spirit for the purpose of prayer.” (I Peter 4:7)



“It is the last hour.” (I Jn. 2:18)

Also, care to explain away this fact, Daniel was told to seal up his vision because it would be fulfilled roughly 500 years later, but John was told NOT to seal up his vision. Are we to believe that the unsealed vision that was also told the time was near has still NOT happened while Daniel’s sealed up vision passed in 500 years? Your thoughts?



6th century B.C: "Seal up the vision; for it shall be for many days." (Dan. 8:26) Came to pass around 500 years later.

1st century A.D.: "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near." (Rev. 22:10) Came to pass ?????



SUEDE

 

[Justme]

 

[Toms777]

Not much to say, but you just had to get it out???

 

[stauron]

The Bible does. And I believe what it says.

Again, you have to prove that from the conetxt. So far all the arguments that I have seen have been towards trying to prove that the Bible doesn't mean what it says. What is not clear is whay Jesus was so specific about what we were to look for if indeed that is not what would happen.

So, I take it that you agree with me that historically there is no evidence that all mankind was bropught to the edge of extinction.

The Bible doesn't. You are assuming that it does.

I agree that there are no references to all mankind being brought to the edge of extinction and that there is no historical evidence to match this lack of biblical data.

There are no references to the end of the material universe in the Bible. There are plenty about the end of the age. 70 ad was the end of the AGE.

This is what the suffering and anhilation of that day was about :

God divorced His covenant people, wrote Ichabod over them, judged them for their faithlessness and slew them. It is unrepeatable. God disowned the rebels and gave the kingdom to another. Those were the days of vengeance where God poured out His wrath and brought to a close the Old Covenant. He also brought to fruition all the promises to the (faithful, Jewish) fathers. The divinly appointed means of worship, the "holy" city and the "holy" people were all cast down and found disfavor with God. How is that not earthshaking? We take our status in Christ for granted and fail to realize what has taken place on our behalf when we think it no small thing that branches were broken off for us.

This fits the context and honors the time frame. This happened in 70AD.

 

[Toms777]

Matt 24:22
22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.

Now show us the historical evidence that this happened.+++



Parousia70 has already covered this, and I back him fully. I’ve been following this dialog. For one that says their time is precious, you sure do like to rehash items.

Just trying to get an answer on this point. So far no historical evidence has been presented - the efforts have all been to say that it doesn't mean what it literally says.

As I said, I will be looking at one item at a time, so as soon as the historical evidence is provided or you agree that there is no historical evidence, or until it is clear that it is impossible to get an answer either way, I will continue to look for the histical evidence of this fulfillment.

[/QUOTE]

 

[enoch son]

I have not read all the post (time limit) But a Preterism point of view is interesting. But to go there one most also believe that all where presaved and that nothing is done outside of God's will. Or no free will. Also Rapture is not in the book. Taken away is 1 thes.. Can anybody answer what taken away?

 

[parousia70]

Let me get this straight, you agree that there is no historical evidence that mankind was brought close to extinction in 70AD

YES WE AGREE!! Shall I say it Louder so you can quit asking?

YES WE AGREE!!!!

and therefore Matt 24:22 was not fulfilled in 70AD.

Therefore no such thing.

The time limitations on the fulfillment of Matt 24 eliminate any other time than the 1st century for it's fulfillment. You need it to be otherwise, but it isn't.

If Matt 24 speaks of Global catyclism as you insist, then the Bible is a lie. Thankfully, the Bible is true, and Matt 24 came to pass within the lifetimes of the apostles EXACTLY AS JESUS PROMISED it would.

Matt 24 (or any scripture for that matter) is not speaking of global catyclism.

Comparing scripture with scripture shows this to be true.

--Compare this--

Matt 24:29
"Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

--to this--

Isaiah 13:10
For the stars of heaven and their constellations Will not give their light; The sun will be darkened in its going forth, And the moon will not cause its light to shine.

Now Tom, Isaiah 13:10 is describing the Overthrow of Babylon by Medeo persia in 539 BC.

None of these events ocourred in the physical literal sense as the prophet Isaiah describes, but History proves the prophesy was none the less FULFILLED as Babylon was indeed destroyed by the Medes in 539BC.

This is apocalyptic language. This is how the Bible discusses the fall of a nation. The NT prophets do not suddenly change the meaning of the same language that OT prophets used metaphorically.

You need to show some kind of scriptural justification for your desire to apply a polar opposite interpratation to the prior BIBLICAL use of this exact same language.

You can't.

Lets look at another example that shows your error.

--compare this--

Isaiah 34:3-5 (NKJV) Also their slain shall be thrown out; Their stench shall rise from their corpses, And the mountains shall be melted with their blood. 4 All the host of heaven shall be dissolved, And the heavens shall be rolled up like a scroll; All their host shall fall down As the leaf falls from the vine, And as fruit falling from a fig tree. 5 "For My sword shall be bathed in heaven; Indeed it shall come down on Edom, And on the people of My curse, for judgment.

--to this--

2 Peter 3:12
Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

--and this--

Revelation 6:14
And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.

In Isaiah 34 we have a description of the fall of Edom, not the destruction of the planet or universe, but the "apocalyptic language" that is used to describe this LOCAL judgement upon an INDIVIDUAL NATION is echoed in the NT's descriptions of the Judgement against Jerusalem.

Since this language describes the judgement of God on nations in the OT, why, when you come to the New Testament, do yo make it be the destruction of the universe? It is only because you do not understand how the Bible uses this apocalyptic language.

I recommend Milton terry's Book "Biblical apocalyptics" which can be found online here:

http://www.audiowebman.org/bbc/books/ba/BA_index.htm

My previous posts #79 & 80, whcih not suprisingly you brushed aside without even an attempt at a lucid refutation, spelled out this relationship in exhaustive detail, providing multiple examples of the prior biblical usage of this language which unrefutably shows your personal interpratation to be error.

Until you can gain a grasp of how the Bible uses this language, you will be hopelessly stranded in your 21st century, Buck Rogers, hollywood fantasyland, your Bible interpratations running wherever your imaginations wants, spending the rest of your life speculating on what next current event is the fulfillment of end times prophesy.

It's a pity really.

All the while The fact remains:
Jesus Christ, the Lord of heaven and earth, came in the glory of the Father and did so in the lifetimes of the apostles, exactly as he promised. (Matt 16:27-28; 24:33-34).

 

[Toms777]

Toms777: Let me get this straight, you agree that there is no historical evidence that mankind was brought close to extinction in 70AD

parousia70:
YES WE AGREE!! Shall I say it Louder so you can quit asking?

Okay, so we have the first prophecy that we agree was not fulfilled in 70AD.

Now, since this was a kay factor in scripture regarding the great tribulation, can we now agree that 70AD does not meet the criteria as a "..great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be"? *(Matt 24:21)

 

[Toms777]

The Bible doesn't. You are assuming that it does.

I agree that there are no references to all mankind being brought to the edge of extinction and that there is no historical evidence to match this lack of biblical data.

Two of your friends have admitted that the evidence does not exist and yet the Bible clearly tells us that this is one of the signs that define the tribulation as being the worst that will ever exist at any point in history.

Matt 24:20-23
21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
NKJV

Do you believe that Jesus mis-led us by telling us to look for this sign?

 

[Der Alte]

YES WE AGREE!! Shall I say it Louder so you can quit asking?

YES WE AGREE!!!!

Therefore no such thing.

The time limitations on the fulfillment of Matt 24 eliminate any other time than the 1st century for it's fulfillment. You need it to be otherwise, but it isn't.

This is precisely what the preterists try to do with Matt 10:5 and 23. vs. 5 addresses the disciples concerning the, then, present single missionary journey. But with preterist presto-chango, suddenly, vs. 23, like a souped up DeLorean, leaps 35-40 years into the future.

Until they can gain a grasp of how the Bible uses this language, they will be hopelessly stranded in their 1st century, fantasyland, their Bible interpretations running wherever their imaginations wants, spending the rest of their lives twisting, wresting, spiritualizing, metaphorizing, poeticalizing, verse upon verse, speculating on which ancient prophecy they can reinterpret to make it preterist.

 

[stauron]

Two of your friends have admitted that the evidence does not exist and yet the Bible clearly tells us that this is one of the signs that define the tribulation as being the worst that will ever exist at any point in history.

Matt 24:20-23
21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
NKJV

Do you believe that Jesus mis-led us by telling us to look for this sign?

The tribulation was for the Jews. It was exactly as Jesus predicted it would be.

I believe that the people that heard Jesus' words understood and looked for the signs.
You believe that Jesus mislead the disciples.

The exact events that He predicted took place, and if the disciples understood things the way you do they would all have been destroyed in Jerusalem along with the harlot.

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.

 

[ikester]

just a few questions...if I may jump in ....Luke 21....Christ speaks of signs of his return...but in the middle...he says....but before all these....then he proceeds to explain about being delivered up..then on to the fall of Jerusalem..and the jews being led away into captivity...so now he's past the fall of Jerusalem...anyway..what do preterist consider the fulfillment of...Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles..until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled....

and in Matt.24 verse15...when ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation...now with the excecption of John...were not the rest of the disciples dead before the temple destruction...

did Josephus write anything pertaining to receiving the mark of Nero to buy or sell...surely he himself would have had to have the mark as well....

 

[stauron]

This is precisely what the preterists try to do with Matt 10:5 and 23. vs. 5 addresses the disciples concerning the, then, present single missionary journey. But with preterist presto-chango, suddenly, vs. 23, like a souped up DeLorean, leaps 35-40 years into the future.

Until they can gain a grasp of how the Bible uses this language, they will be hopelessly stranded in their 1st century, fantasyland, their Bible interpretations running wherever their imaginations wants, spending the rest of their lives twisting, wresting, spiritualizing, metaphorizing, poeticalizing, verse upon verse, speculating on which ancient prophecy they can reinterpret to make it preterist.

Der Alter,

If you are right about Matt 10, it doesn't impact Matt 21-24. As you all have been trying to prove the context of each is on its own.

You so far have not presented anything demonstrating a better grasp of biblical language. The disciples were sure left in a tight spot, according to your view. The Jews persecuted the Church near to death for almost 40 years and then the entire Jewish economy was razed and the poor Christians stood around and wondered if any of it was significant because Jesus was so ambiguous that they had to wait and guess if all the mess was the "real" one or not...