What's your eschatology objective?

[riverrat]

For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. (Matt.12)

So I am evil because I think preterism is ugly.
Great logic.
Maybe you should consider the plank in your own eye. Calling someone evil that disagrees with you might be evil also.

 

[shturt678s]

Let's take another overview of Revelation:

From Dionysius and Eusebius through Augustine till about 1590 the Amillennial view held the chief position, ie, approximately 1200 years of Amillennialism.

Today, the RCC + Lutherans + Reformed = a little less than two thirds of all Chrisitians on the planet = Amillennialism.

My end point: Amillennialism is a very credible view of Revelation.

Nowist Jack

 

[Douggg]

Let's take another overview of Revelation:

From Dionysius and Eusebius through Augustine till about 1590 the Amillennial view held the chief position, ie, approximately 1200 years of Amillennialism.

Today, the RCC + Lutherans + Reformed = a little less than two thirds of all Chrisitians on the planet = Amillennialism.

My end point: Amillennialism is a very credible view of Revelation.

Nowist Jack

Hi Jack, I think everyone can agree with you that Amillennialism is a "widespread" view. Thanks.

"credible"? I don't think you are going to win a popularity contest with futurists on that one.

But there is no right or wrong answer to the question in the opening post. Thanks for your participation.

 

[shturt678s]

Hi Jack, I think everyone can agree with you that Amillennialism is a "widespread" view. Thanks.

"credible"? I don't think you are going to win a popularity contest with futurists on that one.

But there is no right or wrong answer to the question in the opening post. Thanks for your participation.

Thank you again Douggg.

I thought the Futurist view lost steam very early in the early centuries, eg, Papias, and etc. then the Jesuit Francisco Ribera in 1580 or 90 generated a Commentary adding much fuel to the Futurist cauldron? So you do also know the papacy fueled Futurism in 1580 or so? btw I have nothing against the papacy.

Curious Jack, and aloha from Hawaii also,

Don't get wrong as always appreciate you and your words

 

[ebedmelech]

Let's take another overview of Revelation:

From Dionysius and Eusebius through Augustine till about 1590 the Amillennial view held the chief position, ie, approximately 1200 years of Amillennialism.

Today, the RCC + Lutherans + Reformed = a little less than two thirds of all Chrisitians on the planet = Amillennialism.

My end point: Amillennialism is a very credible view of Revelation.

Nowist Jack

The problem, is in America dispensationalism dominates, and particularly because of the Southern Baptist Church as well as most Baptist churches.

Just as many will call me "preterist", not understanding my fuller position is Amillennial (as my profile states). It's quite difficult to separate amil from partial preterist, one has to know where the dividing line is...they don't!

I really hate to say I'm amill or partial preterist...but that seems the only shortcut to helping one understand what your eschatological beliefs are.

Saints are to quick to divide over such things rather than maintain the unity of the Spirit.

 

[parousia70]

It is preterism that is ugly.

Then why on earth do you personally subscribe to a certain degree of it?

So I am evil because I think preterism is ugly.

No, it just means you have a personal conundrum when you vilify a position you yourself happen to hold.

 

[riverrat]

Then why on earth do you personally subscribe to a certain degree of it?




No, it just means you have a personal conundrum when you vilify a position you yourself happen to hold.

And you are a dispensationalist.

 

[shturt678s]

The problem, is in America dispensationalism dominates, and particularly because of the Southern Baptist Church as well as most Baptist churches.

Just as many will call me "preterist", not understanding my fuller position is Amillennial (as my profile states). It's quite difficult to separate amil from partial preterist, one has to know where the dividing line is...they don't!

I really hate to say I'm amill or partial preterist...but that seems the only shortcut to helping one understand what your eschatological beliefs are.

Saints are to quick to divide over such things rather than maintain the unity of the Spirit.

Only a head's up: The actual dividing began at 70 A.D. with those that "remain in" through the Trumpets of delusions since 70 A.D. that John penned in 96 A.D. were, and are the ones being divided at Rev.11:1 at this very moment for example - You can call this whatever; however pretty serious for all those that think that have their tickets to heaven just because their minister or church said they did and awake in the wrong place having forever to think about it.

Sorry, got carried away

Jack

btw speak your heart as learned one thing since I've been on this great forum for little more than 6 months, ie, nobody really cares what we posit, ie, especially if it's the inconvenient and uncomfortable Truth - just no personal attacks, and etc. of course.

btw I think the Amillennilist RCC has more members than all the dispensationalist in America for sure?

 

[ebedmelech]

Only a head's up: The actual dividing began at 70 A.D. with those that "remain in" through the Trumpets of delusions since 70 A.D. that John penned in 96 A.D. were, and are the ones being divided at Rev.11:1 at this very moment for example - You can call this whatever; however pretty serious for all those that think that have their tickets to heaven just because their minister or church said they did and awake in the wrong place having forever to think about it.

Sorry, got carried away

Jack

btw speak your heart as learned one thing since I've been on this great forum for little more than 6 months, ie, nobody really cares what we posit, ie, especially if it's the inconvenient and uncomfortable Truth - just no personal attacks, and etc. of course.

btw I think the Amillennilist RCC has more members than all the dispensationalist in America for sure?

Well. you're making my point Jack. There are Amills that will agree 70 AD is fulfilled.

There are Amills that will not give credence to 96 AD because after 70 AD. Since Christ began to reign upon His ressurection the pivotal event is 70 AD...after that the scriptures are silent and we are to live in the light of the writings of HOW the church should conduct itself throughout time. That would be the 1000 year reign!

I am of that persuasion! If we live in light of the examples of the early church, as the world is being evangelized by the apostles and how Jesus tells the apostles how to be in the persecution as well as the destruction of the temple/Jerusalem, how does the future matter, if we're holding fast to the Lord...it doesn't.

 

[parousia70]

Originally Posted by riverrat

It is preterism that is ugly.
​

P70: Then why on earth do you personally subscribe to a certain degree of it?


Originally Posted by riverrat

So I am evil because I think preterism is ugly.
​

P70: No, it just means you have a personal conundrum when you vilify a position you yourself happen to hold.

And you are a dispensationalist.

Therefore...?

 

[riverrat]

Originally Posted by riverrat

It is preterism that is ugly.
​

P70: Then why on earth do you personally subscribe to a certain degree of it?


Originally Posted by riverrat

So I am evil because I think preterism is ugly.
​

P70: No, it just means you have a personal conundrum when you vilify a position you yourself happen to hold.



Therefore...?

So.......?

 

[Interplanner]

Rat , I have never seen any other post by you except to complain that someone is a preterist! Nothing. Do you think that is "learning" or is a position?

The reason for knowing about John of Gischala is that is who Josephus thought was the leader of the rebels prophesied to come 490 years from 445 BC and disintegrate Jerusalem. Jospephus was a trained priest in 1st century Judaism.

Do you know what 1st century Judaism is?

You sound very ill. Hope you are doing well, and have a merry Christmas in Christ's grace!

 

[Interplanner]

I have seen several form of futurist's at work as evangelism, and some of it is subjective, and some of it is worthless. Subjective = the changed life is the gospel, which is pretty much confusion.

The attention to Rom 16 was not about that. it was that a person is supposed to use the OT to illuminate the Gospel, not to find futurism. Not to find events in Israel. Not to become a master on the mechanical details of how God has wrath. It is to follow the pattern of Romans: justification by faith, not by race or ethnos or works or Judaism. The ethnos of Israel never mattered; it was always just a container inside of which were some who had faith that God was recognizing. To use the OT the way Romans does. The redeemer came to Zion and took away the debt of sin. God has now bound all mankind to sin (jews one way, gentiles another) and now wishes to have mercy on them all about their debt, through Jesus Christ. Amen. It's fantastic. This purpose of the OT was hidden there until the decree. If you read the OT apart from this you will probably be d'ist, Judaizer or futurist or all three.

 

[riverrat]

Rat , I have never seen any other post by you except to complain that someone is a preterist! Nothing. Do you think that is "learning" or is a position?

The reason for knowing about John of Gischala is that is who Josephus thought was the leader of the rebels prophesied to come 490 years from 445 BC and disintegrate Jerusalem. Jospephus was a trained priest in 1st century Judaism.

Do you know what 1st century Judaism is?

You sound very ill. Hope you are doing well, and have a merry Christmas in Christ's grace!

ner,
Complaining about preterism is a position.
How many times do I need to tell you that I am not interested in John of Gischala?
I assume that 1st century Judaism is what Jews believed in the 1st century.
Thanks for being concerned about my health. I am doing fine.
Hope you have a merry Christmas also.

 

[Interplanner]

rat, if it's any help, your communication is so poor Parousia thinks you are a preterist. You might want to learn how to explain youself, and then explain yourself. It might take about a year to learn how.

 

[Interplanner]

So...about 1st cent. Judaism: do you think they had it right? Caiaphas seems to have made a critical decision based on that belief. He thought he might be able to pacify Rome by executing Jesus, thinking he was getting rid of the person Dan 8-9 was about. Jn 11 and 18. Because of that, it is significant that Josephus did not see it that way although he was trained in the same Judaism. He thought the person of Dan 8-9 was John of Gischala in Galilee.

You have also implied that the 490 years is to be broken up, by your answer. Why is that? Why would it be broken up but Mt 1's 3 sets of 14 generations is not, nor is Paul's 430 years from the promise to the covenant? If it is not broken up, the evil character leading the destructive rebellion of Dan 8-9 is within the 490 years.

 

[shturt678s]

Well. you're making my point Jack. There are Amills that will agree 70 AD is fulfilled.

There are Amills that will not give credence to 96 AD because after 70 AD. Since Christ began to reign upon His ressurection the pivotal event is 70 AD...after that the scriptures are silent and we are to live in the light of the writings of HOW the church should conduct itself throughout time. That would be the 1000 year reign!

Thank you again. Jesus began to reign before His resurrection and at the Cross the 1,000 years began with the binding of Satan in his person. The 70 A.D. (Lk.21:24) is the beginning of the 42 months at Rev.11:2.

I am of that persuasion! If we live in light of the examples of the early church, as the world is being evangelized by the apostles and how Jesus tells the apostles how to be in the persecution as well as the destruction of the temple/Jerusalem, how does the future matter, if we're holding fast to the Lord...it doesn't.

Jack

 

[riverrat]

rat, if it's any help, your communication is so poor Parousia thinks you are a preterist. You might want to learn how to explain youself, and then explain yourself. It might take about a year to learn how.

No, ner, you are not nor have you ever been nor will you ever be any help.
I think Parousia has me confused with someone else, maybe it is you.
I see no need to explain myself.
Your posts are mostly gibberish.

 

[riverrat]

So...about 1st cent. Judaism: do you think they had it right? Caiaphas seems to have made a critical decision based on that belief. He thought he might be able to pacify Rome by executing Jesus, thinking he was getting rid of the person Dan 8-9 was about. Jn 11 and 18. Because of that, it is significant that Josephus did not see it that way although he was trained in the same Judaism. He thought the person of Dan 8-9 was John of Gischala in Galilee.

You have also implied that the 490 years is to be broken up, by your answer. Why is that? Why would it be broken up but Mt 1's 3 sets of 14 generations is not, nor is Paul's 430 years from the promise to the covenant? If it is not broken up, the evil character leading the destructive rebellion of Dan 8-9 is within the 490 years.

Thanks for proving my point about most of your posts being gibberish.

 

[coraline]

So I am evil because I think preterism is ugly.
Great logic.
Maybe you should consider the plank in your own eye. Calling someone evil that disagrees with you might be evil also.

You said it, not me.

I am only giving you a quote from Jesus to consider.