Whaturism?

[Barraco]

Futurists..Preterists...Millenialists...This is beginning to sound rediculous. In mankind's never ending infatuation to classify anything and everything, there is seldom any room for self interpretation. By that I mean, when it happens, it happens.

The facts: We can't place the fulfillment of all prophecy in the past because Christ hasn't come yet. We can't place the fulfillment of all prophecy in the future because that would make Christ out to be a liar when he said, "I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." We can't worry about the Millenium because Christ hasn't come yet.

In all our attempts to structure prophecy, we have made prophecy to be more of a fortune teller than God's message to his children. We have uprooted the possibility that God's word may be fulfilled when and how he wants it with when and how we think it should be. Well, not all of us or even most. But why follow such a structure? Just let God's Word be fulfilled when it is.

The Bible has a consistency with itself. When it mentions something for the first time, its important. So when something in prophecy happens, don't pass it up for something based on your skepticism. Like the four beasts of Daniel. THEY HAVE BEEN FULFILLED. The seven years of Daniel 9; by what authority to we have to cut and paste the fulfillment of the last week of Daniel 9? Its like someone said, "Hey, look! Seven years. Lets give them to the antichrist!" By what authority?

And we definately can't give the millenium to the Medieval Church, because those were times of ignorance and great wickedness and bloodshed. The millenium is supposed to be 1,000 years of peace on earth.

We can't say that the trumpets have happened already because when in history has 1/3 of mankind been killed in one hour by smoke, fire, and brimstone?

And the last plague hasn't happened because the greatest earthquake ever is reserved for just prior to Christ's immediate return.

And the secret rapture....C'mon now. If the early apostles didn't teach it, then why are we teaching it? Wouldn't the apostles have had more revelation and authority to teach than us?

If we keep our hearts on the Gospel, the Revelation of Jesus Christ will be revealed. God bless

 

[NumberOneSon]

Futurists..Preterists...Millenialists...This is beginning to sound rediculous.

Don't forget Historcists.

In Christ,

Acts6:5

 

[Simon_Templar]

As with everything, people should worry less about defending or proving their school of thought on eschatology, and more about letting scripture speak for itself, and seeking truth and understanding, rather than seeking to win arguments.

 

[JesusServant]

and don't forget pan

 

[Barraco]

Don't forget Historcists.

In Christ,

Acts6:5

Is Historicism actually an eschatological teaching, or is it just a classification of those who look in history to find the fulfillment of prophecy? I was under the impression that Eschatology had to do with Millenialism, Preterism, Futurism, and Tribulationism. I would actually call Historicism the original form of intepretation, seeing that it wasn't called historicism until the prophecies were fulfilled. All Historicism does is look back on the possible fulfiments of prophecy and is not connected with Preterism. I think it was the eschatologists that called it historicism. Other than that, I don't think it had a category for its method of interpretation. God bless

 

[greg1290]

It is because the abomination of desolation has already happened.

 

[jeffweeder]

If we keep our hearts on the Gospel, the Revelation of Jesus Christ will be revealed. God bless

A very good post indeed

12 "I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
13 "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.

 

[LamorakDesGalis]

Is Historicism actually an eschatological teaching, or is it just a classification of those who look in history to find the fulfillment of prophecy?

Historicism is connected to eschatology because it is one of the four major approaches to the book of Revelation. The other approaches to the book of Revelation are preterist, futurist, and idealist.

The main difference between the preterist and historical views is that preterists see most of the events as largely fulfilled in the 1st century, while the historical views see most of the events as ongoing or being fulfilled throughout church history.

LDG

 

[lecoop]

...
And the secret rapture....C'mon now. If the early apostles didn't teach it, then why are we teaching it? Wouldn't the apostles have had more revelation and authority to teach than us?

Sorry, but Paul was the only apostle to receive the revelation of the rapture of the church. It is there is black and white. Why are you arguing agaist His word?

Coop

 

[lecoop]

It is because the abomination of desolation has already happened.

Yes, indeed, the abomination has happened, several times, to one extent or another. When Jesus mentioned the "abominaton of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet," Antiochus Epiphanes had already become a type of the beast of Revelation, by performing such an act as sacrificing a pig on the alter, and then setting up an image of Zeus!

But what was Jesus pointing to? Was He pointing to the immediate future and Titus? Did Titus perform anything close to what Antiochus did? No, 70 AD was not where Jesus was pointing, for He was speaking of the time of the end. End of what? End of the Law? End of the typical Jewish worship in the destroyed temple? Or end of the first 6000 years, and time for the millennial reign?

There can be no doubt that Jesus, speaking by and with the Holy Spirit, was pointing to both the destruction of the temple, and the end of the age. We are therefore, still waiting for a more complete fulfillment of the abomination of desolation. We are still waiting for most of the book of Revelation to be fulfilled.

Coop

 

[OhhJim]

Sorry, but Paul was the only apostle to receive the revelation of the rapture of the church. It is there is black and white.

He must have done a very poor job of communicating it to his pupils then, because none of them taught it. In fact, nobody taught it until 1820.

 

[Parousia]

Yes, indeed, the abomination has happened, several times, to one extent or another. When Jesus mentioned the "abominaton of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet," Antiochus Epiphanes had already become a type of the beast of Revelation, by performing such an act as sacrificing a pig on the alter, and then setting up an image of Zeus!

But what was Jesus pointing to? Was He pointing to the immediate future and Titus? Did Titus perform anything close to what Antiochus did? No, 70 AD was not where Jesus was pointing, for He was speaking of the time of the end. End of what? End of the Law? End of the typical Jewish worship in the destroyed temple? Or end of the first 6000 years, and time for the millennial reign?

There can be no doubt that Jesus, speaking by and with the Holy Spirit, was pointing to both the destruction of the temple, and the end of the age. We are therefore, still waiting for a more complete fulfillment of the abomination of desolation. We are still waiting for most of the book of Revelation to be fulfilled.

Coop

Jesus said to His disciples standing right there with Him in the first-century (pre-AD 70). "When YOU see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet . . . ." Matthew 24:15. How much clearer could Jesus have been?

But just in case people might not understand, He said--"THIS generation will by no means pass away till ALL THESE THINGS take place" (Matthew 24:34).

How many abominations of desolation did Daniel speak of? If Jesus' disciples right there with Him saw it, why do we yet look for another?

Parousia