• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Preterists: Did anyone SEE Jesus come again?

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by edpobre, Oct 24, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. OldShepherd

    OldShepherd Zaqunraah

    +165
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others

    • גאל vb. redeem, act as kinsman — Qal 1. act as kinsman, do the part of next of kin, גאל kinsman. a. in taking a kinsman’s widow. b. in redeeming from bondage; c. in redeeming a field; d. claim as kinsman; e. גאל הדם the avenger of blood. 2. redeem, by payment of value assesed, of consecrated things, by the original owner. 3. redeem, with God as subj. implying personal relationship, chiefly in poetry: a. individuals, from death, orphans. b. Israel, from Egyptian bondage. c. from exile; Yahweh is גאל; and the people גאולים (cf. גאלי infr.). Niph. 1. refl. redeem oneself. 2. pass. be redeemed, a. field, slave; b. consecrated things; c. Jerusalem by Yahweh

      Whitaker, R., Brown, F., Driver, S. (. R., & Briggs, C. A. (. A. 1997, c1906. The Abridged Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew-English Lexicon of the Old Testament : From A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament by Francis Brown, S.R. Driver and Charles Briggs, based on the lexicon of Wilhelm Gesenius. Edited by Richard Whitaker (Princeton Theological Seminary). Text provided by Princeton Theological Seminary. (electronic ed.) . Logos Research Systems, Inc.: Oak Harbor WA
    Is that good enough for you EV? While this article in the hardbound copy of BDB is somewhat longer, I repeat once again "vindicate", in any of its forms, is not part of the definition of "Ga'el"
     
  2. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    Oh, I had already looked it up in BDB myself, OS. There's no need to post it here for me. ;)

    Your problem, of course, is that there's nothing here in BDB which contradicts Zodhiates, Bruce and Dummelow. :cool:
     
  3. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    Here's what Job 19:25 looks like in the New English Translation:

    • As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives,
      and that as the last
      he will stand upon the earth.
    The editors of the NET have placed a footnote against "Redeemer", which reads as follows:

    • Or “my Vindicator.” The word is the active participle from ga’al, “to redeem, protect, vindicate.” The word is well-known in the OT because of its identification as the kinsman-redeemer (see the Book of Ruth). This is the near kinsman who will pay off one’s debts, defend the family, avenge a killing, marry the widow of the deceased.

      The word “redeemer” evokes the wrong connotation for people familiar with the NT alone; a translation of “Vindicator” would capture the idea more. The concept might include the description of the mediator already introduced in Job 16:19, but surely here Job is thinking of God as his vindicator.

      The interesting point to be stressed here is that Job has said clearly that he sees no vindication in this life, that he is going to die. But he knows he will be vindicated, and even though he will die, his vindicator lives. The dilemma remains though: his distress lay in God’s hiding his face from him, and his vindication lay only in beholding God in peace.
    :cool:
     
  4. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    From the Jamieson-Faussett-Brown Commentary:

    • The idea in "redeemer" with Job is Vindicator (Job_16:19; Num_35:27), redressing his wrongs; also including at least with us, and probably with him, the idea of the predicted Bruiser of the serpent's head. Tradition would inform him of the prediction.

      FOSTER shows that the fall by the serpent is represented perfectly on the temple of Osiris at Philæ; and the resurrection on the tomb of the Egyptian Mycerinus, dating four thousand years back. Job's sacrifices imply sense of sin and need of atonement. Satan was the injurer of Job's body; Jesus Christ his Vindicator, the Living One who giveth life (Joh_5:21, Joh_5:26).
    :cool:
     
  5. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    The New American Bible renders Job 19:25 in the following way:

    • But as for me, I know that my Vindicator lives, and that he will at last stand forth upon the dust;
    :cool:
     
  6. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    From Vincent's Word Studies, on Matthew 16:

    • God was the God of the dead as well as of the living; present in the dark chambers of Sheol as well as in heaven (Psa_139:8; Psa_16:10). This is the underlying thought of that most touching and pathetic utterance of Job (Job_14:13-15), in which he breathes the wish that God would hide him with loving care in Hades, as a place of temporary concealment, where he will wait patiently, standing like a sentinel at his post, awaiting the divine voice calling him to a new and happier life. This, too, is the thought of the familiar and much-disputed passage, Job_19:23-27. His Redeemer, vindicator, avenger, shall arise after he shall have passed through the shadowy realm of Sheol.

      “A judgment in Hades, in which the judge will show himself his friend, in which all the tangled skein of his life will be unravelled by wise and kindly hands, and the insoluble problem of his strange and self-contradicting experience will at last be solved - this is what Job still looks for on that happy day when he shall see God for himself, and find his Goel (vindicator) in that Almighty Deliverer” (Cox, “Commentary on the Book of Job”).
    :cool:
     
  7. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    From a Professor of Old Testament at Houghton College:

    • While it can be claimed that Job 19:25 is not narrative--indeed it appears in the dialogue part of the book, sandwiched in between the prologue and the epilogue--it can only be interpreted in the context of the narrative of the book. Job clearly qualifies as a person needing a go'el.

      An examination of this verse will continue and intensify the personal dimension of the go'el. While translated "Redeemer" by the familiar KJV, it is better rendered "Vindicator" (NJPS, NEB and NRSV Footnote). Job does not primarily need to be rescued from death--in fact, he longs for it--but needs to be vindicated before the accusing Satan figure (of which he is unaware) and the three friends.


      Full text available here.
    :cool:
     
  8. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    GW, I believe that you may consider yourself to have been thoroughly... vindicated. ;)
     
  9. OldShepherd

    OldShepherd Zaqunraah

    +165
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Oh BTW I noticed you haven’t responded to most of the scriptures I have cited. For example, I have mentioned Isaiah 34 twice.
    You’re not reading again. I clearly said it was fulfilled, my argument is that nothing in the entire passage indicates that the Assyrian, or any other, army represents God coming in the clouds.
    Prove it!. Prove that YHWH was not physically seen.
    Your God is incapable of causing the sun and moons to be dark, without destroying the world and all of mankind? Read Isaiah 55:8
    You have not proven that Isaiah 32 did not literally occur and when Matthew 24 was spoken it was still in the future, not fulfilled.
    You have not proven that Revelation referred to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem. In fact, the preponderance of, and most credible, evidence, which I provided, proves that Revelation speaks of events after 95 AD.
    Begging the question in the face of repeated refutation of this presumption. I have rebutted every proof text you have posted.
    Note, this asinine comment from a person who couldn’t locate a Hebrew verb if he had a gun to his head. But since it contradicts your presumptions and presuppositions then resort to d hominem, “Zionistic”, etc. blah, blah, blah.
    No he didn’t! This of course is the interpretation when you approach the scriptures with presuppositions and assumptions. But what happens if we read Job 14? Is Job praying for “vindication” in his mortal lifetime or “redemption” in the resurrection? I’ll trust those so-called Zionist Jews and BDB over your scripture and resource twisting any day.

    • 12 So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep.
      13 O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me!
      14 If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.
    I thought I saw a couple of comments about the Jews knew that no one could see God and live but as I looked back through I couldn’t find them. But ask yourself why that has absolutely no relevance to our present discussion? Answer, because “No man can see the face of God and live.” In the “proof texts” you yourself posted, those who were said to have seen the arm of God, etc., did not live afterward. They were killed. So once again I challenge you to prove that God did not appear to any of the nations He visited judgment on.
     
  10. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    Hmmm...

    So you'd "rather trust" unbelieving Jews and a lexicon which doesn't actually contradict the definition of go'al with which GW is working?

    Sorry, but I just don't see the logic here.
     
  11. OldShepherd

    OldShepherd Zaqunraah

    +165
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Ev,
    Thank you so much for your input. Once again we have the opinions of scholars in opposition to the recognized language resources. While I might concede arguendo, that "ga'el" could be understood as "vindicator" that is not one of the recognized definitions. And be that as it may, that is not the crux of my argument, which you have actually supported.

    Our friend GW claims that Job was vindicated and beheld his vindicator, in his lifetime. But at least three of your sources support my contention that Job was speaking of seeing his redeemer/vindicator after his death.

    Thanx for the help there.
     
  12. OldShepherd

    OldShepherd Zaqunraah

    +165
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    That is not what I said. Read it again. But yes let me repeat and clarify my earlier statement. I will trust Hebrew speaking Jews to interpret Hebrew scriptures over the interpretation of one or more persons who can't read or translate Hebrew and who have already repeatedly demonstrated selective quoting and twisting of scripture and other resources.

    BDB doesn't contradict GW's definition of "ga'el"? I guess technically you are right, there is no statement in BDB which says "Ga'el does NOT mean vindicator." Maybe you can get BDB to put that disclaimer in their next edition, so people like yourself and GW won't misunderstand.
     
  13. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    Hi there, OS. :)

    You're welcome.

    No, that's a false dichotomy. What we have here is textual critics and language experts who are not "in opposition to the recognised language resources." We actually have consensus here between BDB and the sources to which I have referred. If you think that they're in opposition to one another, the onus is on you to prove it.

    So... do you intend to prove it? And if so, how?

    I have just proved that it is one of the recognised definitions. It does not appear in BDB - but who cares? BDB is not the be-all and end-all of OT Hebrew. And in any case, what you need to prove is that "vindicator" stands in opposition to the definitions provided by BDB. But it doesn't!

    Oh, but it is not actually my intention to defend one side against the other! I'm not a Preterist, or a Dispensationalist, or a Futurist. (I'm a Historicist!) I only jumped in because I didn't think your comments about the word go'el were justified. And they're not.

    Well, that's just plain silly, isn't it? Job didn't see his vindicator at all.

    Yep, they do indeed! And that's exactly what I believe! :D

    You're welcome. :cool:
     
  14. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    OS -

    I'm not asking you to. What I want to know is whether or not you will also trust Zodhiates, Bruce, Dummelow, Vincent, JFB, Schultz, and the editors of the NET & NAB - and if not, why not?

    Nope. And if you think it does, I'll need proof.

    What you actually mean that "vindicator" does not appear as one of the definitions in BDB - which is not necessarily the same as "does not support it." The very least you need for "does not support it", is a list of definitions which flatly contradict it!

    And yet... they don't. :cool:
     
  15. OldShepherd

    OldShepherd Zaqunraah

    +165
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    I believe I clarified my position sufficiently but you arguing simply for the sake of argument have selectively quoted my previous posts to make it appear otherwise.
     
  16. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    No, I am not "simply arguing for the sake of argument", nor have I "selectively quoted" anything.

    My intentions (which are, let us remember, quite clearly stated), should be clear to any objective observer.

    I have also asked you a number of questions which remain unanswered. :cool:
     
  17. OldShepherd

    OldShepherd Zaqunraah

    +165
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Well I am really terribly concerned about the number of questions which remain unanswered. I seem to remember a great many other questions which remain unanswered. John 1, the trial of Jesus, John 8:58, The meaning of "eis" in the N.T..
     
  18. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    LOL!

    That was answered. You just didn't like the answer.

    LOL! You had questions about the trial of Jesus? That's a laugh! I never got a straight one out of you on that point!

    See my answer re. John 1.

    Well, I'll give you that one.

    So let's call upon A. T. Robertson:

    • Unto the remission of your sins (eis aphesin to&#772;n hamartio&#772;n hu&#772;mo&#772;n).
      This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of eis does exist as in 1Co_2:7 eis doxan he&#772;mo&#772;n (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of eis for aim or purpose.

      It is seen in Mat_10:41 in three examples eis onoma prophe&#772;tou, dikaiou, mathe&#772;tou where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in Mat_12:41 about the preaching of Jonah (eis to ke&#772;rugma Io&#772;na). T hey repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koiné [28928]š generally (Robertson, Grammar, p. 592).

      One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received.
    At least he's honest enough to admit that his personal interpretation is largely subjective! :cool:
     
  19. GW

    GW Veteran

    +58
    Christian
    I most certainly have been vindicated.

    :)

    And, by the way, to get back to the topic, Jesus was most certainly seen when he came in the glory of the Father to destroy apostate Israel and remove the Old Testamental System from human existence. Jesus the Stone came as he promised and he did grind them to powder (Matt 21:40-45). As Yahweh had come down with clouds so many times before to judge nations and individuals, so also Christ came in the glory of the Father. Jesus promised his apostles that they would see all those signs come to pass as well as His return in their generation:

    Matthew 24:33-34
    So, you too [the apostles], when YOU see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.
     
  20. GW

    GW Veteran

    +58
    Christian
    OLD SHEPHERD:
    Oh BTW I noticed you haven’t responded to most of the scriptures I have cited. For example, I have mentioned Isaiah 34 twice.

    GW:
    So, you're not going to explain how Yahweh was seen over Greece blowing a trumpet and defending his people in battle in Zech 9:13-16?

    While I must have missed your comments on Isaiah 34 somewhere in these threads, I can only say that this is another great example of apocalyptic language. Here we see another of Yahweh's comings--the Day of the Lord (Isa 34:8) against all nations back in the 500s BC. The particular mention of God's sacrifice of the nations (including Edom) found in Isa 34 harmonizes with Ezekiel 25 and 26, where Edom's doom is particularly listed in Ez 25:12-14. It also harmonizes with Jeremiah 49:7-22 and the entire prophecy of Obadiah. As the prophecies said, Edom was destroyed at that time. Here again we see the usual apocalyptic metaphors: Jehovah comes down for battle to bring his sword against nations (Isa 34:5-9), the universe colapses (Isa 34:4), the destruction of these civilizations is compared to a blood sacrifice on God's alter (34:6), it's the Day of the Lord's vengeance (Isa 34:8 -- compare to the Day of the Lord's vengeance of AD 66-70 spoken of in Luke 21:20-22) and so on. We could find many more apocatlyptc metaphors by seraching the Ezekiel and Jeremiah and Obediah accounts. All this, of course, shows us how Christ's coming in the glory of the Father at AD 66-70 was precisely of the same nature as all the previous Jehovhah-comings foretold by the prophets and fulfilled in OT times.


    OLD SHEPHERD:
    You’re not reading again. I clearly said it was fulfilled, my argument is that nothing in the entire passage indicates that the Assyrian, or any other, army represents God coming in the clouds.

    GW:
    It is evident that the various disasters of Isaiah 19 upon Egypt are personally doled out by Yahweh's coming. Yahweh rides a cloud down to Egypt (19:1). He leads a civil war in the country (19:2). Yahweh turns them over to the cruel Assyrian Monarch (probably Sargon). Yahweh brings disasters upon them (19:16). This passage was fulfilled, and serves as another strong context for how we are to understand the Lord's coming against Israel and the nations back in the first century when the commonwealth was destroyed, Rome burned, the demonized Temple worship both at Jerusalem and Rome were leveled, and the Kingdom of God triumphed as the New Covenant Church was established forever.


    OLD SHEPHERD:
    Prove it!. Prove that YHWH was not physically seen.

    GW:
    John 1:18
    No one has seen God at any time

    1 John 4:12
    No one has seen God at any time

    Exodus 33:20
    But He said, "You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!"


    You see, for as much as the prophets said Yahweh was seen leading marches and organizing wars, and launching arrows and bringing his sword to battles and such, they meant none of this in optical terms. Yahweh is not seen doing such things with earthly eyes, but with the eyes of faith and the understanding of the covenant promises. God promised them in their covenant Law that God would do such things according to contract, and they fully understood when He did. And they knew their God as a great warrior. So also Christ came in the glory of the Father in their generation and destroyed them by his presence (Matt 24:33-34; Matt 16:27-28; Matt 10:22-23).


    OLD SHEPHERD:
    Your God is incapable of causing the sun and moons to be dark, without destroying the world and all of mankind? Read Isaiah 55:8

    GW:
    Again, you show that you have a very long way to go on understanding the apocalyptic language of the Hebrew prophets. The prophets don't mean the literal cosmology is being destroyed--the use of such metaphors speak of downfall of kings and princes and civilizations. For example, Revelation 6:12-15 is St. John's use of nearly identical apocalyptic language to past apocalypses, and we see there that the truth of the passage is symbolic in the same ways the OT prophets used the terms for apocalypses in their days:

    Revelation 6:12-15
    I looked when He broke the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became like blood; and the stars of the sky fell to the earth [compare to Isaiah 13:10; Ez 32:7,8] , as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wind. The sky was split apart like a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. [compare to Isa 34:4]. Then the kings of the earth and the great men and the commanders and the rich and the strong and every slave and free man hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains [compare to Is 2:10,19,21]

    In the same way as these things had been fulfilled in ancient times through the fall of kings and nations and civilizations, so also were these things fulfilled back in the first century when Christ and the apostles declared them and they came to pass, especially in the desolation of apostate Israel. Again, since you seem to agree with me that such things have been fulfilled in the past, pertaining to various OT judgment-comings of Yahewh, join me in declaring that Christ and the apostles were true prophets in their declaration of such things in their generation.


    OLD SHEPHERD:
    You have not proven that Isaiah 32 did not literally occur and when Matthew 24 was spoken it was still in the future, not fulfilled.

    GW:
    I think you mean Ezekiel 32, and since you and I both believe the passage is fulfilled in all its apocalyptic sense, then join me in asserting that when Christ and John used the same language about events of their generation, we rightly understand that the fall of Israel and the disasters of the Empire are meant:

    Matthew 24:29,34
    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...This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

    Revelation 1:1,3
    The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass...Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein for the time is at hand.



    OLD SHEPHERD:
    You have not proven that Revelation referred to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem. In fact, the preponderance of, and most credible, evidence, which I provided, proves that Revelation speaks of events after 95 AD.

    GW:
    Note that the timeframe and the subject of the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem can only refer to AD 66-70:

    Revelation 1:1,3
    The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass...Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein for the time is at hand.

    Revelation 11:1-2; 8; 13
    And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein...it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months....And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified [i.e., Jerusalem]...And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.

    Revelation 22:6-7
    And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.



    OLD SHEPHERD:
    Note, this asinine comment from a person who couldn’t locate a Hebrew verb if he had a gun to his head. But since it contradicts your presumptions and presuppositions then resort to ad hominem , "Zionistic", etc. blah, blah, blah.

    GW:
    The interpretation you offered up from the Zionists there was a laughable allegorical interpretation--it was a travesty of scripture. The book of Job is not some allegory for modern day political Israel and her Zionistic political hopes. What nonsense that was. Their interpretation is tantamount to me saying that the meaning of Job is that Job is a symbol of the people of Ohio, who by our suffering will eventually see her liberation from the commenwealth of States to gain her place as the head of North America by which the world will then be redeemed under Bob Taft!

    C'mon, get your head in the game.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...