The Ten Horns from a Preterist view point.

[jamescarvin]

Hi again NILLOC

Your advocating and describing a dual economy or dual dispensaton idea of dispensationalism and/or zionism. Again, remember that those seeking a kingdom on this earth may not be heirs of the 'eternal' kingdom of the New Heaven/New Earth. Nor do they recieve the 'blessings of Abraham' in this life and His present Kingdom.
.

No, this is not what I am advocating. I am saying that the Jews will be Christians in the new millennium. They will not be resorting to the old covenant in that time. In the millennium, the Christians, now raptured or raised from the dead, reign with them in resurrected incorruptible bodies from Jerusalem and rule the world with a rod of iron.

Those seeking a kingdom in "this world" may not inherit the kingdom in so far as some passages, especially in Paul, refer to the system of the world. But in the age where Christ reigns and satan is bound, we are not talking about an earth as we know it that is ruled by the prince of this world. We are talking about heaven on earth. And earth as the Lord's footstool.

When I refer to Old Testament prophecy and promises that is(are) yet to be filled, expecting them to be fulfilled in the future, I am not suggesting a resorting to the old covenant law. The law is fulfilled in Christ.

When I say that Zionism is not about world dominance, I am going by what Jews I have talked to have told me. If you have any links which show a connection between Zionism and anything other than a protection of Israel itself, please let me know.

Joshua also did not conquer the whole land that was promised. The height of success of land acquisition was under David. This neither reached as far as the Euphrates to the north or to the River of Egypt to the south. I have heard one commentator suggest David did at least attempt some of this territory, but even if this was true it would not fit what the Lord said. That he had given it.

The promise is found in Gen. 15:18-21

18On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying,
"To your descendants I have given this land,
From the river of Egypt as far as the great river, the river Euphrates:

19the Kenite and the Kenizzite and the Kadmonite
20and the Hittite and the Perizzite and the Rephaim 21and the Amorite and the Canaanite and the Girgashite and the Jebusite."

This then will be the land given to the children of faith, not of the law. It has never yet been fulfilled. So it pertains to the future.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

No, this is not what I am advocating. I am saying that the Jews will be Christians in the new millennium. They will not be resorting to the old covenant in that time. In the millennium, the Christians, now raptured or raised from the dead, reign with them in resurrected incorruptible bodies from Jerusalem and rule the world with a rod of iron.

That has been dispensationalism teaching from almost a century. No such thing as a future "millenium".

If I myself thought there was, I would side with the Catholics on them being in it as they now believe. Once the last bowl is pour out on the Great City, it is finished.

Luke 21:28 Beginning yet to-be-becoming these-things, up-bend!, and lift up! the heads of ye, thru-that is nearing the loosing of ye [Daniel 12/Reve 19,20]

Reve 16:17 and the seventh one pours out the bowl of him upon the air and came out Voice, great, out of the sanctuary from the throne saying :it-has-become/gegonen <1096> (5754).

Reve 21:6 And He said to me: "it-has-become/gegonen <1096> (5754).
I am the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end. I, to the one thirsting, shall be giving out of the spring of the water of the life gratuitously.

 

[Nilloc]

Hi jamescarvin.

Joshua also did not conquer the whole land that was promised. The height of success of land acquisition was under David. This neither reached as far as the Euphrates to the north or to the River of Egypt to the south. I have heard one commentator suggest David did at least attempt some of this territory, but even if this was true it would not fit what the Lord said. That he had given it.

This then will be the land given to the children of faith, not of the law. It has never yet been fulfilled. So it pertains to the future.

Joshua pretty clearly indicates that the land part of the promise was fulfilled:

Joshua 21
43 So the LORD gave Israel all the land he had sworn to give their forefathers, and they took possession of it and settled there. 44 The LORD gave them rest on every side, just as he had sworn to their forefathers. Not one of their enemies withstood them; the LORD handed all their enemies over to them. 45 Not one of all the LORD's good promises to the house of Israel failed; every one was fulfilled.
​

I see the land promise as a sort of tithe to Abraham. In the Old Testament times, a tithe was given to YHWH to show that He really owned all of your money; the tithe was a way of stating that. God giving Canaan to Abraham temporarily was a kinda down payment to Abraham, whose real promise was the whole world.

God Bless.

 

[GW]

I agree that the land promises were fulfilled no later than Joshua's time. This history then became a type of entering God's heaven/paradise, which was fulfilled in the first century when the Christ came.

Also, dispensationalists who suggest that the future will involve a return to the Old Testament temple and sacrifices and priesthood etc. are gravely misunderstanding the bible. The New Covenant is Christ's covenant. The Old Covenant of Moses has dissolved and only the moral law of it was retained in Christ's Covenant. The Old order has passed, the New is come.

 

[Nilloc]

Also, dispensationalists who suggest that the future will involve a return to the Old Testament temple and sacrifices and priesthood etc. are gravely misunderstanding the bible.

Good quote in your sig btw.

 

[Notrash]

When we talk of the old covenant, this is not talking of the same religion that the jews display today.

The old covenant was first thought of as an 'old covenant' by the announcement of the 'new' covenant in Jeremiah 31. It is also sometimes thought of as the Mosaic Covenant. I think some people confuse the "old covenant' with the Abrahamic covenant" and blessings given to Abraham and his 'seed'.

Jeremiah 31: 31 Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah-- 32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more."

This teaching goes directly against the talmudic Judaism where the jews are taught the interpretations that are handed down to them by the Rabbi's. Here God says that He Himself will be our teacher... and elswhere in the New testament we know that this teaching is based on the unconditional forgiveness and adoption as 'sons of God' and thus being able to ask anything of Him, and to ask directly to Him for wisdom. James talks of this as does John in his Gospel and epistles.

What then was this 'old covenant'?

Well, we note that it was begun in Egypt when God took them by the hand to begin leading them to the land promised to them. And then, doing a little searching we read of this covenant being spelled out by Moses in Deut 11-30ff when he came down from the Mount.

Deut 11:8
"Therefore you shall keep every commandment which I command you today, that you may be strong, and go in and possess the land which you cross over to possess, 9 and that you may prolong your days in the land which the Lord [fn1] swore to give your fathers, to them and their descendants, 'a land flowing with milk and honey.' 10 For the land which you go to possess is not like the land of Egypt from which you have come, where you sowed your seed and watered it by foot, as a vegetable garden; 11 but the land which you cross over to possess is a land of hills and valleys, which drinks water from the rain of heaven, 12 a land for which the Lord your God cares; the eyes of the Lord your God are always on it, from the beginning of the year to the very end of the year.
13 'And it shall be that if you earnestly obey My commandments which I command you today, to love the Lord your God and serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul, 14 then I [fn2] will give you the rain for your land in its season, the early rain and the latter rain, that you may gather in your grain, your new wine, and your oil. 15 And I will send grass in your fields for your livestock, that you may eat and be filled.' 16 Take heed to yourselves, lest your heart be deceived, and you turn aside and serve other gods and worship them, 17 lest the Lord's anger be aroused against you, and He shut up the heavens so that there be no rain, and the land yield no produce, and you perish quickly from the good land which the Lord is giving you.
18 "Therefore you shall lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul, and bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. 19 You shall teach them to your children, speaking of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up. 20 And you shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates, 21 that your days and the days of your children may be multiplied in the land of which the Lord swore to your fathers to give them, like the days of the heavens above the earth.
22 "For if you carefully keep all these commandments which I command you to do--to love the Lord your God, to walk in all His ways, and to hold fast to Him-- 23 then the Lord will drive out all these nations from before you, and you will dispossess greater and mightier nations than yourselves. 24 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads shall be yours: from the wilderness and Lebanon, from the river, the River Euphrates, even to the [fn3] Western Sea, shall be your territory. 25 No man shall be able to stand against you; the Lord your God will put the dread of you and the fear of you upon all the land where you tread, just as He has said to you.
26 "Behold, I set before you today a blessing and a curse: 27 the blessing, if you obey the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you today; 28 and the curse, if you do not obey the commandments of the Lord your God, but turn aside from the way which I command you today, to go after other gods which you have not known. 29 Now it shall be, when the Lord your God has brought you into the land which you go to possess, that you shall put the blessing on Mount Gerizim and the curse on Mount Ebal. 30 Are they not on the other side of the Jordan, toward the setting sun, in the land of the Canaanites who dwell in the plain opposite Gilgal, beside the terebinth trees of Moreh? 31 For you will cross over the Jordan and go in to possess the land which the Lord your God is giving you, and you will possess it and dwell in it. 32 And you shall be careful to observe all the statutes and judgments which I set before you today.

The latter chapters of this section of Deut talk of the cursings if and when they do not continue in the commands. These are opposite of the blessings and include the plagues that they escaped even in Egypt.

Deut 29:1 "Now it shall come to pass, if you diligently obey the voice of the Lord your God, to observe carefully all His commandments which I command you today, that the Lord your God will set you high above all nations of the earth. 2 And all these blessings shall come upon you and overtake you, because you obey the voice of the Lord your God:

15 "But it shall come to pass, if you do not obey the voice of the Lord your God, to observe carefully all His commandments and His statutes which I command you today, that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you:

The chapter lists the curses which are opposite of the blessings.

Now when Moses was on the Mount recieving both the 10 commandments and the law, when he came down, they could not look upon him unless his face was sheilded. But even so; this glorious covenant has been abolished and is done away.

2 Cor 3:13 And not as Moses, [which] put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:

3:7 But if the ministration of death, written [and] engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which [glory] was to be done away: 8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?

Thus, the conditional Covenant of the land promise to be kept by the Israelites has ended and no longer has any support or effectiveness by God. Those who moved into the land in the last century did so by their own strenght and manipulations and by conning the world through sympathy and false indoctrinations. They were not led of the Spirit in their battles and rather than actually following the commandments, they follow and put their faith in the rabinical interpretations, additions and twists to the commandments. They do not have the ark of the covenant to go before them in battle as those under Joshua did.

2 Cor3 and Hebrews primarily in chapters 6-10 speak very openly about this.

When I say that Zionism is not about world dominance, I am going by what Jews I have talked to have told me. If you have any links which show a connection between Zionism and anything other than a protection of Israel itself, please let me know.

Well, lets have a few. I would suggest a book by Douglas Reed titled: The Controversy of Zion.
Benjamin Freedman is also a name to google as he is a former jew/zionist who began speaking out against world zionism.http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/freedman.htm

Zionism = Communism with the elite talmudic zionists ruling over and benefiting from the other nations.

http://judicial-inc.biz/JB.Campbell.htm
http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/HTML%20Pages/VanNattan_hypocrite_liar.htm#TOC1_7
This one talks about the teaching of the Talmudic Rabbi's which I have been mentioning.
http://www.fixedearth.com/talmud.html
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/zionism.htm
http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/synagogue_of_satan.htm
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/facts2.htm#one-manInstitute
This one is from a jew, and I dont' know if it can be fully trusted but his perspective is that a jew is not neccessarily a zionist.
http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/differencejudzion.html
This one is islamic, but has a rational base to it.
http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/7357

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Now when Moses was on the Mount recieving both the 10 commandments and the law, when he came down, they could not look upon him unless his face was sheilded. But even so; this glorious covenant has been abolished and is done away.

Great post. I am a preterist myself and how do you view that "mountain of fire" in Revelation? The City of Jerusalem [which is also shown burning] was also on a mountain wasn't it? Just trying to tie this in to the Hebrew OC of the Jews. Thoughts?

Hebrew 12:18 For ye came not near to the mountain touched and scorched with fire, and to blackness, and darkness, and tempest,
19 and a sound of a trumpet, and a voice of sayings, which those having heard did entreat that a word might not be added to them,

Revelation 8:8 And the second messenger did sound, and as it were a great Mountain with fire [OC?] burning was cast into the Sea,.......

 

[Notrash]

Revelation 8:8 And the second messenger did sound, and as it were a great Mountain with fire [OC?] burning was cast into the Sea,.......

It certainly seems as though this could be referring to the old covenant especially if one has the perspective that Revelation is mostly referriing to the timeperiod of the 60-75 AD.

 

[Nilloc]

When we talk of the old covenant, this is not talking of the same religion that the jews display today.

The old covenant was first thought of as an 'old covenant' by the announcement of the 'new' covenant in Jeremiah 31. It is also sometimes thought of as the Mosaic Covenant. I think some people confuse the "old covenant' with the Abrahamic covenant" and blessings given to Abraham and his 'seed'.



This teaching goes directly against the talmudic Judaism where the jews are taught the interpretations that are handed down to them by the Rabbi's. Here God says that He Himself will be our teacher... and elswhere in the New testament we know that this teaching is based on the unconditional forgiveness and adoption as 'sons of God' and thus being able to ask anything of Him, and to ask directly to Him for wisdom. James talks of this as does John in his Gospel and epistles.

What then was this 'old covenant'?

Well, we note that it was begun in Egypt when God took them by the hand to begin leading them to the land promised to them. And then, doing a little searching we read of this covenant being spelled out by Moses in Deut 11-30ff when he came down from the Mount.




The latter chapters of this section of Deut talk of the cursings if and when they do not continue in the commands. These are opposite of the blessings and include the plagues that they escaped even in Egypt.


The chapter lists the curses which are opposite of the blessings.

Now when Moses was on the Mount recieving both the 10 commandments and the law, when he came down, they could not look upon him unless his face was sheilded. But even so; this glorious covenant has been abolished and is done away.



Thus, the conditional Covenant of the land promise to be kept by the Israelites has ended and no longer has any support or effectiveness by God. Those who moved into the land in the last century did so by their own strenght and manipulations and by conning the world through sympathy and false indoctrinations. They were not led of the Spirit in their battles and rather than actually following the commandments, they follow and put their faith in the rabinical interpretations, additions and twists to the commandments. They do not have the ark of the covenant to go before them in battle as those under Joshua did.

2 Cor3 and Hebrews primarily in chapters 6-10 speak very openly about this.



Well, lets have a few. I would suggest a book by Douglas Reed titled: The Controversy of Zion.
Benjamin Freedman is also a name to google as he is a former jew/zionist who began speaking out against world zionism.http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/freedman.htm

Zionism = Communism with the elite talmudic zionists ruling over and benefiting from the other nations.

http://judicial-inc.biz/JB.Campbell.htm
http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/HTML Pages/VanNattan_hypocrite_liar.htm#TOC1_7
This one talks about the teaching of the Talmudic Rabbi's which I have been mentioning.
http://www.fixedearth.com/talmud.html
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/zionism.htm
http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/synagogue_of_satan.htm
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/facts2.htm#one-manInstitute
This one is from a jew, and I dont' know if it can be fully trusted but his perspective is that a jew is not neccessarily a zionist.
http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/differencejudzion.html
This one is islamic, but has a rational base to it.
http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/7357

Wonderful post Notrash, I'll have to save it in a Word document.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

It certainly seems as though this could be referring to the old covenant especially if one has the perspective that Revelation is mostly referriing to the timeperiod of the 60-75 AD.

Or that the whole Book is referring to a change of Covenants/Priesthoods.

Note that horribly misinterpreted parable of the "rich-man/lazarus" in Luke 16. Isn't the symbolic "lake of fire" mentioned in it?
I believe if a Christian understands that one Parable, revelation will "come alive" so to speak. Interesing discussion on the GA board at this link. Thoughts?

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7259006
The useless (?) tree of life

 

[jamescarvin]

Hi jamescarvin.

Joshua pretty clearly indicates that the land part of the promise was fulfilled:

Joshua 21
43 So the LORD gave Israel all the land he had sworn to give their forefathers, and they took possession of it and settled there. 44 The LORD gave them rest on every side, just as he had sworn to their forefathers. Not one of their enemies withstood them; the LORD handed all their enemies over to them. 45 Not one of all the LORD's good promises to the house of Israel failed; every one was fulfilled.
​

I see the land promise as a sort of tithe to Abraham. In the Old Testament times, a tithe was given to YHWH to show that He really owned all of your money; the tithe was a way of stating that. God giving Canaan to Abraham temporarily was a kinda down payment to Abraham, whose real promise was the whole world.

God Bless.

I'm getting a little out-numbered here by preterists. And I'm a little frustrated because I just attempted to reply to this post I worked on at length and for some reason it got deleted when I submitted it, so here goes again. Meantime I see there are already three or four other posts. But whatever...

I totally appreciate your view regarding the tithe of Abrahamic land. I see this as a type of levitical portion that belongs to the earth. But I see Christ reigning from there from what was always Eden, only protected by an angel so that no one could enter. The four rivers that flow from there could only come back if there was a great earthquake. And I think there will be just that when the Lord returns. Otherwise, they have no significance for us, and there is little reason to mention them.

The Abrahamic Covenant certainly describes a territory that extends beyond the borders described that either Joshua or David took. The promises to the forefathers of Israel may have been fulfilled, but not those to Abraham, which extended as far north as the Euphrates and as far south as the River of Egypt. Now we don't know what the River of Egypt may mean. It could be a reference to the Nile, or as others have suggested, something closer to any formerly known parts of Israel. Or, and this is my view, it could refer to the Gishon and the Pishon, because essentially what we are talking about here is a restored Eden when we are referring to the Promised Land. Otherwise the promises are not really worth fighting over.

Somebody also quoted Gregory of Nyssa, a love of mine. He was among a long list of anti-chilliasts who rose up in the fourth century- Caius of Rome, St. Dionysius of Alexandria, Origen, St. Basil, St. Gregory the Nazianzus, St Epiphanius, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Eusebius, St. Augustine and Jerome and lots of others from later times.

Augustine's City of God describes well the allegorizing of the millennium that equates it with church. And I can fully appreciate his thinking and that of all these fathers who were very encouraged by the new alignment of the church with the human empire that allowed them to preach the Gospel to the whole world unhindered and really enjoy seeing the teaching of Christ and the moral laws of Christianity become the law of the land.


However, to think that they had any insider knowledge regarding eschatology is erroneous. Quite the contrary, out of any early father who preceded them who wrote on the subject, which naturally we have less copy of due to antiquity under persecution, there was a consensus agreement (re: catholic) with respect to the literal interpretation of a millennium. Papyas, Irenaeus, Justin, Barnabas, Hyppolitus: these were not heretics, but the apostolic pillars of the faith, and all were chilliasts. Appolinarius and the Ebionites were also chilliasts, but by contrast, held to a very worldly view of the millennium. The Ebionites were of the party of James. Gregory of Nyssa rightly rejected these chilliasts. For the rest of the church, a future better time, was less of an issue. Good times were already starting to roll. But there was also much to be said for the types that are given for our day through the Comfortor, who is with us always until the end of the age. Just as life began during the first five days and had much in common with man, so does the kingdom begin in the beginning and anticipate its fulfness in Christ.

Gregory of Nyssa complains about multiple resurrections. But millennialists only believe in one resurrection (or translation) per person. And it is not as though he had any insider knowledge on the subject, as did Papyas, a disciple and possible direct acquaintance of John. The type of Bacchanalian feasts some early Hellenistic Christians imagined the millennium to be, particularly the heretics, stem from his fragments, which were misunderstood. When he spoke of grapes competing with eachother to be chosen he was speaking of the fruit of the Spirit, where the seeds of faith sown by the work of the Spirit are multiplied, bearing fruit 30, 60 and 100-fold, in Christ, whose every work yields everlasting results.

No one can question the influence St. Augustine had on the church. Yet most people understand that he carried his Pelagianism with him in much of his thinking, even if he argued against Pelagius at length. The dualism of the flesh versus the spirit came to an all time high as the church started to teach through the Empire and the temptations of the flesh caused many to escape "the world" via the monasteries in the desert. In some cases the depravity of man was absolutized. So the notion that the Kingdom is "not of this world" translated somehow into "not for this earth."

None of what I am speaking of is dispensationalist or NeoDarbian. It goes back 2000 years, not 100 years. I am not a Protestant. I simply believe in the restoration of all things.

I see in the Sacraments the fulfillment of all things, because the incarnate Logos dwells with us in the flesh, declaring to us constantly that we are not God, that we, the body of Christ, have our fulfillment only in Him, that we see now by faith, but one day, face to face. And that we, as body of Christ, are on a journey, not yet having arrived in the Promised Land, yet seeing in this daily Bread, a supply of Life, which does defeat satan, which does mean Life in the Spirit in Rebirth from heaven. We put on Christ, becoming partakers of the divine nature, our hope. We encounter the Alpha and the Omega, the Unchanging, the Perfect Word, the Complete.

Yet our journey has not reached its conclusion. Our bridegroom has not yet met us, even if we already enjoy something like a prenuptial relationship. But the marriage is not fully consummated.And he is not yet all in all. He is complete. We are not. We receive him now by faith. But before the new heavens and the new earth begin, I woulld really like to put on Christ, to be clothed in His righteousness in a much greater way than I now am. I'm sure most people would like that.

What I am telling you is very good news for human history. It is part of the good news of salvation. If he is truly king now, then why are we such hypocrites? And where is our power? Show it to me! I can't make out the face of Christ in this church. He has been utterly obscured.

But in that day, satan is bound, and we enter into a fuller communion. Eden is restored. And the Sacraments continue with a level of thanksgiving the church does not yet know. And would we not recognize him face to face when our bodies are risen in glory, incorruptilble and without stain or blemish, having every molecule of our life in Him? Of course we would, and so will the whole world.

This is one thing I wish people could understand as they consider the Fulness of Truth they partake of. The consummation of all history is already contained in Him. As such the body of Christ is complete. But it is hardly visible in this world. It is not a light to the nations. Maybe it was to some extent, or people hoped it would be in the fourth century. But it certainly isn't now. And history only teaches us man's ways of doing things. The church chose the sword and dies by it. There is hardly anything it has done that the sorcerers of Egypt couldn't imitate. Chris Angel does better tricks than the antichrist.

But bring me the Righteous King who will continue the exorcism he started the day he visited the Gedarenes. I want Him to rule. I'm glad He doesn't have to be elected democratically. People would vote for Obama instead of Hm. I really don't want to go to heaven having to declare that earth's history was not improved by the victory of Jesus. Please don't let this be what goes into the Book of Life! And neither do I want to arrive there complaining that his Words were just a bunch of allegories.

No, let me say that He made the earth His footstool and that he knitted us together and rose us all up in Himself until he became all in all. That is how I'd like the story to go. Wouldn't you? Well, I doubt that any of us here are better authors than He is. So exactly why are we denying that there may be a coming millennium when not only is there plenty of Scripture indicating that it will be, confirmed by the apostolic fathers as such, and when the church stands to be blessed by considering it theologically as I have, and when we, as the human family, have so much to gain by it?