Questions about preterism

[frost]

GW, care to address the 1000 years of peace question stated earlier?

 

[GW]

GW, care to address the 1000 years of peace question stated earlier?

Hi Frost. I'm running into a time crunch, but here's the short answer.

A future literal "thousand years" period is taught nowhere in scripture. You can't find it in the Old Testament. You can't find it in the gospels or the epistles. The only mention of such is Rev 20, in which the "thousand years" is one of the book's many symbolic images.

It is crucial to note that the gospels and epistles explicitly teach that the resurrection, the "New Heavens/Earth," and the judgment all take place at the second coming of Christ. They are not separated out in any fashion by any future thousand-years period as millennialists would have it.

 

[OldShepherd]

Hi Frost. I'm running into a time crunch, but here's the short answer.

A future literal "thousand years" period is taught nowhere in scripture. You can't find it in the Old Testament. You can't find it in the gospels or the epistles. The only mention of such is Rev 20, in which the "thousand years" is one of the book's many symbolic images.

It is crucial to note that the gospels and epistles explicitly teach that the resurrection, the "New Heavens/Earth," and the judgment all take place at the second coming of Christ. They are not separated out in any fashion by any future thousand-years period as millennialists would have it.

[p][size=+1]If "soon,", in the NT, especially Matt 24, means "soon," and "this generation" means "this generation," i.e. the generation to which Jesus was speaking in Matt 24, why doesn't a "thousand years" in Rev 20:2-7, mean a literal "thousand years?" What is the UR rule for determining which scriptures are literal and which are spiritual, metaphorical, allegorical, figurative, etc.?[/size]

 

[nikolai_42]

*********[size=+1]If "soon,", in the NT, especially Matt 24, means "soon," and "this generation" means "this generation," i.e. the generation to which Jesus was speaking in Matt 24, why doesn't a "thousand years" in Rev 20:2-7, mean a literal "thousand years?" What is the UR rule for determining which scriptures are literal and which are spiritual, metaphorical, allegorical, figurative, etc.?[/size]

OS, even I (definitely NOT a full-preterist) can see that the thousand years that John spoke of was spoken of from a heavenly POV. The entire vision was one from heaven and from that perspective which is why it was so symbolic. And if we accept that Peter's "....thousand years is like a day..." (and vice-versa) is true (which I know the preterists are loathe to accept in other situations), then the thousand years in Revelation is likely anything BUT a literal thousand years.

And what do you mean by UR.......?

 

[AradJohn]

i think ur is your

 

[frost]

In doing research on preterism, I've come across several web sites both for and against preterism. There is one, though, that has a lot of arguments against it. The author, John Shepard, makes some very good arguments against pretersim and I just wondered if some of you full-preterists have seen it. I'm not asking you to refute his article (it's quite lengthy,) but I'd like to know if you've read it and what is your over-all opinion of his reasoning. The link is:
http://northforest.com/kingisrael/h009d007.html

Thanks

 

[GW]

Frost,

I can't get that link to work.

I'd be happy to take a quick glance. I doubt there's anything new there that I haven't seen before. I've spent a few years refuting all the usual objections by futurists--objections that, upon further inquiry, never amount to anything of substance. I was once a premillennial dispensationalist...then a post-trib futurist...then an amillennialist...and finally a preterist--I know all the objections, 'cause they were the ones that I once had along the journey from there to here. All comparative studies in eschatology lead to preterism.


Frost, please feel free to send me an email anytime if you want. I might have a time crunch with work in the next month, so emailing me is a good way to go if you ever have a question.

Blessings in Jesus,
GW

 

[frost]

GW,

I edited my post, let me know if it still does not work. I have to admit, the pre-mil position leaves a lot to be desired. I used to embrace it (though I never really sought to disprove it,) but upon doing research, the scripture seems to back up the preterist view on a number of accounts. I still have difficulties with a few passages of scripture but I hope to learn more about them and how preterists view them. I understand about the time-crunch; I've been pretty busy myself lately at work. Thanks for all your input.

God bless

 

[OldShepherd]

OS, even I (definitely NOT a full-preterist) can see that the thousand years that John spoke of was spoken of from a heavenly POV. The entire vision was one from heaven and from that perspective which is why it was so symbolic. And if we accept that Peter's "....thousand years is like a day..." (and vice-versa) is true (which I know the preterists are loathe to accept in other situations), then the thousand years in Revelation is likely anything BUT a literal thousand years.

And what do you mean by UR.......?

[size=+1]UR = "Universal Restoration". The view being promoted here, that eventually all mankind will be restored, saved, etc. regardless of how they lived.[/size]

"OS, even I (definitely NOT a full-preterist) can see that the thousand years that John spoke of was spoken of from a heavenly POV." [size=+1]I'm not sure this answers anything for me. Are any of the events which John saw while in heaven going to actually occur on earth? What is the "thousand years" symbolic of, if it is not a literal thousand years? How does the "thousand years" of John's Apocalypse relate to other temporal references in the Apocalypse and other NT writings?[/size]

 

[nikolai_42]

[size=+1]UR = "Universal Restoration". The view being promoted here, that eventually all mankind will be restored, saved, etc. regardless of how they lived.[/size]

"OS, even I (definitely NOT a full-preterist) can see that the thousand years that John spoke of was spoken of from a heavenly POV." [size=+1]I'm not sure this answers anything for me. Are any of the events which John saw while in heaven going to actually occur on earth? What is the "thousand years" symbolic of, if it is not a literal thousand years? How does the "thousand years" of John's Apocalypse relate to other temporal references in the Apocalypse and other NT writings?[/size]

I think you've got the wrong flock, Old Shep. This here's the preterism thread.

The thousand years is just as symbolic as the half an hour of silence in heaven. It is just as symbolic as the incense that rises to God. It is just as symbolic as the rivers of living water that flow from one's belly (as the rivers of living water flowing from the throne). It is just as symbolic as the tree of life. You want me to interpret? I can't in this case. I can only surmise. Time with God is nothing. So it could be anything. It could even simply mean 'a long time'. God does not count slackness as men count slackness just as He doesn't reckon time as men do.

 

[GW]

Old Shep, no one here is promoting "Universal Restoration." You're at the wrong board. This is the covenant eschatology board (preterism).

Agape,
GW

 

[GW]

Frost,

I'll definitely be around a bit, but more as a lurker. If you get a chance, pick up one or both of these books by Gary DeMar:

(1) Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church

--and also--

(2) End Times Fiction: a Biblical Consideration of the Left Behind Theology


I bet you could get a used copy of each of these cheap at Amazon or Half.com or someplace. I highly recommend these to everyone. You won't be able to put them down. DeMar's Website is Americanvision.org, and he has great resources on eschatology (and on American Heritage studies too). Bookmark his site.

 

[OldShepherd]

Old Shep, no one here is promoting "Universal Restoration." You're at the wrong board. This is the covenant eschatology board (preterism).

Agape,
GW

[size=+1][font=georgia, times new roman]Sin problema. Substitute PreT for UR and answer the question, if you don't mind. But more correctly this is the Christian Forums board, the thread may be about Preterism[/size][/font]

 

[frost]

Frost,

I'll definitely be around a bit, but more as a lurker. If you get a chance, pick up one or both of these books by Gary DeMar:

(1) Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church

Funny you should mention those, I'm currently reading Last Days Madness. It's a great read. More than a book about preterism, it's a book that tries to debunk futurism. He seems to hold more of a moderate preterist view (partial preterist, I guess,) as he believes Christ will return again at the end of time.

I'd like to plug a web site I've found. It's a radio ministry in Indiana that broacasts on the AM band but you can listen to archived broadcasts on preterism. I even found an interview with Gary DeMar. The link is:

http://www.lighthouseproductionsllc.com/

 

[GW]

Old Shep,

I did answer the question about the thousand years. And, I have no idea why you introduced "Universal Restoration" into the discussion (it seems sorta off topic).

My earlier comment reposted re: "thousand years":

A future literal "thousand years" period is taught nowhere in scripture. You can't find it in the Old Testament. You can't find it in the gospels or the epistles. The only mention of such is Rev 20, in which the "thousand years" is one of the book's many symbolic images.

It is crucial to note that the gospels and epistles explicitly teach that the resurrection, the "New Heavens/Earth," and the judgment all take place at the second coming of Christ. They are not separated out in any fashion by any future thousand-years period as millennialists would have it.

 

[OldShepherd]

Old Shep,

I did answer the question about the thousand years. And, I have no idea why you introduced "Universal Restoration" into the discussion (it seems sorta off topic).

My earlier comment reposted re: "thousand years":

A future literal "thousand years" period is taught nowhere in scripture. You can't find it in the Old Testament. You can't find it in the gospels or the epistles. The only mention of such is Rev 20, in which the "thousand years" is one of the book's many symbolic images.

[size=+1][font=georgia, times new roman]Is this your answer? You shouldn't worry so much about my UR typo. Your first and second sentences are irrelevant. That the Messiah would have twelve disciples is taught nowhere in scripture. You cannot find it in the OT. But Jesus certainly had twelve disciples.

The fact remains that a "thousand years" is mentioned six (6) times in Rev 20, in six consecutive verses and your only reply is to dismiss it with "it's symbolic." Something mentioned six times is obviously important.[/size][/font]

It is crucial to note that the gospels and epistles explicitly teach that the resurrection, the "New Heavens/Earth," and the judgment all take place at the second coming of Christ. They are not separated out in any fashion by any future thousand-years period as millennialists would have it.

[size=+1][font=georgia, times new roman]Here you are only giving your opinion and not backing it up with any scripture. Your fall back position appears to be, if it does not support Pre-T presuppositions, then it is symbolic, metaphorical, figurative, spiritual, etc. I asked before what is the Pre-T rule for deciding which verses are literal and which are symbolic, metaphorical, figurative, or spiritual? You haven't answered. The position of the historic church is, "If the plain sense makes good sense then it is nonsense to look for any other sense."

If the six mentions of a "thousand years' in Rev 20:2-7 is symbolic, what is it symbolic of? And are the following events also symbolic, for example vs. 8? Will Satan be literally loosed to go out and do battle on the earth? If not what is that symbolic of?[/font][/size]

• 
  8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

 

[nikolai_42]

[size=+1][font=georgia, times new roman]Is this your answer? You shouldn't worry so much about my UR typo. Your first and second sentences are irrelevant. That the Messiah would have twelve disciples is taught nowhere in scripture. You cannot find it in the OT. But Jesus certainly had twelve disciples.

The fact remains that a "thousand years" is mentioned six (6) times in Rev 20, in six consecutive verses and your only reply is to dismiss it with "it's symbolic." Something mentioned six times is obviously important.[/size][/font]

[size=+1][font=georgia, times new roman]Here you are only giving your opinion and not backing it up with any scripture. Your fall back position appears to be, if it does not support Pre-T presuppositions, then it is symbolic, metaphorical, figurative, spiritual, etc. I asked before what is the Pre-T rule for deciding which verses are literal and which are symbolic, metaphorical, figurative, or spiritual? You haven't answered. The position of the historic church is, "If the plain sense makes good sense then it is nonsense to look for any other sense."

If the six mentions of a "thousand years' in Rev 20:2-7 is symbolic, what is it symbolic of? And are the following events also symbolic, for example vs. 8? Will Satan be literally loosed to go out and do battle on the earth? If not what is that symbolic of?[/font][/size]

• 
  8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

OS, are you waiting for riders on horses? Dragons? Women in deserts? Are you looking for a literal thousand years of no deception? Should the devil, who was cast into a bottomless pit ever get out? How is it that he can be cast into something that doesn't end, but yet he gets out after a thousand years? Is it not possible that this vision (which Daniel also glimpsed) is using "A thousand years" as merely a long time? After all, if Daniel saw the same thing, why does he speak only of seasons and times (see esp. 7:12)?

Symbolism is absolutely necessary when speaking of things we cannot relate to. And the vision of John is peppered with things we cannot relate to. So to take the thousand years as simply a thousand years is to tempt bringing the entire vision down to earthly understanding and not to rise to it in the Holy Spirit. It is possible that the thousand years is a thousand years, but to be consistent, it should not be set in stone.

 

[GW]

GW:
A future literal "thousand years" period is taught nowhere in scripture. You can't find it in the Old Testament. You can't find it in the gospels or the epistles. The only mention of such is Rev 20, in which the "thousand years" is one of the book's many symbolic images.


Old Shep:
That the Messiah would have twelve disciples is taught nowhere in scripture. You cannot find it in the OT. But Jesus certainly had twelve disciples.

GW:
Well, it is taught in the O.T., but that is another thread. The twelve apostles were the new twelve patriarchs for Israel--the rulers over the twelve tribes (Mt 19:28; Rev 21:12-15). That's why Jesus appointed the twelve apostles.





OLD SHEP:
The fact remains that a "thousand years" is mentioned six (6) times in Rev 20, in six consecutive verses and your only reply is to dismiss it with "it's symbolic." Something mentioned six times is obviously important.

GW:
First, many symbols in the book of Revelation receive repeated emphasis--this does not change them from being symbols. A symbol is a symbol if it is used one time or many.

Next, it is significant that the "thousand years" is not taught in the OT or the gospels and epistles. Given that fact, and given that its ONLY mention is in a vision that is highly symbolic in nature, the "thousand years" becomes suspect as being symbolic.



OLD SHEP:
Here you are only giving your opinion and not backing it up with any scripture. Your fall back position appears to be, if it does not support Pre-T presuppositions, then it is symbolic, metaphorical, figurative, spiritual, etc.

GW:
The gospels and epistles explicitly teach that the resurrection, the "New Heavens/Earth," and the judgment all take place at the second coming of Christ. They are not separated out in any fashion by any future thousand-years period as millennialists would have it. This is an established fact, and it makes a "millennium period" an impossibility.




OLD SHEP:
I asked before what is the Pre-T rule for deciding which verses are literal and which are symbolic, metaphorical, figurative, or spiritual?

GW:
Biblical precedent. The OT prophets used apocalyptic symbols, the same ones employed by the NT prophets concerning AD 70. We need only know our Old Testment scriptures well enough so that we can recognize and understand the same symbols and idioms when they are used in the New Testament scriptures.


OLD SHEP:
You haven't answered. The position of the historic church is, "If the plain sense makes good sense then it is nonsense to look for any other sense."

GW:
The historic Church says that "if the plain sense makes good sense then it is nonsense to look for any other sense"? Hmm... sounds very modern to me, and decidely from the dispensationalist camp. Whatever happened to finding the biblical sense? Let scripture interpret scripture.

Wish I had more time to post, but I don't. As always, Old Shep, God bless you.

 

[frost]

I ran across an intresting scripture today.

1 Corinthians 4:5
Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God. (NIV)

This verse seems be talking about what happens after death (rewards for works, being accountable for our actions, etc.) yet it uses the phrase "til the Lord comes," which preterists associate with judgement and a spiritual return of Christ in 70 AD. To which does it apply?

 

[GW]

FROST:
This verse [1 Cor 4:5] seems be talking about what happens after death (rewards for works, being accountable for our actions, etc.) yet it uses the phrase "til the Lord comes," which preterists associate with judgement and a spiritual return of Christ in 70 AD. To which does it apply?


GW:
Both. That judgment of AD 66-70 had direct application to both "the living" on earth and "the dead" who were no longer on planet earth. Such was plainly understood by St. Peter (see 1 Peter 4:5-7).



As a crucial side point, I think most people understand that the judgment "according to their works" via the Parousia has eternal application to the dead for their afterlife. What I think less people know is that being judged "according to one's works" also had an effect upon those alive on earth at the time of the tribulation/days of vengeance:

(1) See Paul's statement about Alexander the coppersmith according to his works (2 Tim 4:14)

(2) See Christ's statement about rewarding the Thyatira false priestess according to her works, and those of her followers (Rev 2:20-23*).

(3) See that Christ is actually judging the works of the Asia Minor churches in Rev chs. 2-3! The entire two chapters are about His judgment of their works.

Ephesus - Rev 2:1-2
Smyrna - 2:8-9
Pergamum - 2:12-13
Thyatira - 2:18-19,23
Sardis - 3:1-3
Philadelphia - 3:7-9
Laodicea - 3:14-15


So, we plainly see there that this judgment had a first-century fulfillment. We get to actually read about how those first-century churches were judged according to their works at the time of Christ's coming to them, including very specific and particular circumstances that applied to each! Amazing.