|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Matt 24 study (cont'd) - 7/7/2008 2:53:53 PM
|
|
|
JazZeke
Posts: 3
Joined: 7/5/2008
Status: offline
|
The greater part of the Old Testament prophets declared an imminent day of the Lord and then imperceptibly segued into the eschatological consummation or the ultimate restoration of Israel and pacification of its enemies; they made no note of the great passage of time between the two events. The best description I’ve found of this doctrine, which is also found in the aforementioned text in Deuteronomy, is “prophetic eschatological intrusion”. Let me quoted from Deuteronomy:
“To me belongeth vengeance, and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste.” Deut 32:35KJV
I’ll quote from John Gill, Matthew Henry and Adam Clarke on their commentary as to what vengeance and calamity was “at hand” and to come upon Israel in “haste”, the calamity Moses was referring to.
quote:
John Gill-INTRODUCTION TO DEUTERONOMY 32
… wherefore, for the rejection of the Messiah and the, persecution of his followers, they would be abhorred of God, De 32:19; who would show his resentment by the rejection of them, by the calling of the Gentiles, and by bringing the nation of the Romans upon them, De 32:20…. whereby utter ruin and destruction in all its shapes would be brought upon them, De 32:22; and, were it not for the insolence of their adversaries, would be entirely destroyed, being such a foolish and unwise people, which appears by not observing what the enemies of the Messiah themselves allow, that there is no rock like him, whom they despised, De 32:26; which enemies are described, and the vengeance reserved for them pointed out, De 32:32; and the song closed with promises of grace and mercy to the Lord's people, and wrath and ruin to his and their enemies, on which account all are called upon to rejoice in the latter day, De 32:36
Matthew Henry-DEUTERONOMY CHAP. XXXII.
In this chapter we have….4. A prediction of the wasting destroying judgments which God would bring upon them for their sins, in which God is here justified by the many aggravations of their impieties (v. 19-33). 5. A promise of the destruction of their enemies and oppressors at last, and the glorious deliverance of a remnant of Israel (v. 36-43).
Adam Clarke-Deuteronomy Chapter 32
The prophetical and historical song of Moses, showing forth the nature of God's doctrine…. Gracious purposes in their behalf, mixed with reproaches for their manifold idolatries, and threatenings against his enemies, 36-42. A promise of salvation to the Gentiles…
Clearly, the expositors above make a mockery of Preterism’s paradigm built upon temporal indicators. According to Gill the calamity that was “at hand” and coming upon them in “haste” were the events of 70 AD and the calling of the Gentiles—almost 1500 years hence. According to Henry the calamity was inclusive of all judgment upon Israel and their ultimate restoration and pacification of its enemies; the latter having yet to take place. And Clarke also confirms the imminent judgments predicted by Moses as encompassing the blessings and curses that were a result of the salvation to the Gentiles at the first advent. Accordingly, Yahweh and His prophets have a different interpretation of “imminence” than Preterism. Obviously, the scope of temporal indicators must conform to Yahweh’s perception of time noted in 2 Peter 3:8 and not Preterism’s paradigm.
Zephaniah forewarned Judah that the day of the Lord is at hand—the imminent judgment at the hands of the Chaldeans (Zep. 1:7) and then imperceptibly segued into the eschatological consummation, the ultimate restoration of Israel and the pacification of its enemies (Zep. 1:2-18; 3:8). Here we have prophetic eschatological intrusion, the prediction of the distant consummation of the Messianic kingdom intruding into an imminent event, which is clearly the doctrine of Deuteronomy 32:2 and a hermeneutic. Clearly this method of the prophets is typological and associated the day of the Lord in their time with the eschatological, antitypical day predicted in the New Testament. Joel, Amos, Isaiah as well as other Old Testament prophets verify that temporal indicators, such as “near” or “at hand”, are not reliable elements upon which to build eschatological doctrine (2 Peter 3:8-9). (This also supports that Historicalism and the “year for a day” principle.)
The New Testament perspective of the day of the Lord is the future. The only reconciliation of the two perspectives concerning the day of the Lord in both the Old and New Testaments is in interpreting the ancient events as typical of the anagogical or eschatological events at the return of Christ, which also underscores the event in 70 AD as typological. This reconciliation precludes multiple fulfillments such as any and all tribulations which the people of Yahweh may face at the hands of the world, which has been the bane of many of the paradigms including classical Historicalism. Where it is upheld that Yahweh chastises the sons and daughters (Heb. 12:6) manifest as hardships, the intercession dubbed the day of the Lord represents the definite time of Yahweh’s judgment drawing a dispensation to an end as the scriptures verify; from our perspective the previous events such as 70 AD are shadows of the theophany at Christ’s return. The judgment that preceded the transition from the first temple age to the second temple age and again at the first advent, the transition from the second temple to that built without hands were typical of the anagogical day of the Lord. This reasoning is also supported by the Olivet Discourse and Christ’s use of the same methodology of the prophets (Matt. 5:17). He also linked the nearness of a typological judgment upon Jerusalem, the events of 70 AD, with his distant eschatological return and this is substantiated by the event concerning the times of the Gentiles.
JazZeke
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 9/2/2008 2:23:15 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 634
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sinner-Saint
Let's see, in the last four posts, all the Preterists have abandoned defending their eschatology and instead are pursuing side issues on the periphery.
Now back to my question:
When are you (all) going to show
how it all already happened?
So far the attempt to say it happens on one word - "soon," "near," or even "this" just hasn't cut it. If you want to build a coherent eschatology, you're going to have to incorporate Daniel, the Olivet Discourses, Revelation, and Paul's letters to the Thessalonians as the main columns and beams upon which to support your structure.
Propping up your eschatology on passages which are not in context just means your structure will be shaky.
It looks like this hasn't been discussed in a while, and for good reason. This post here shows exactly why no issue (especially one as hotly debated as Preterism) should be confined to one, all-purpose thread. There are not less than 4 issues addressed in this one post not to include the comment on "issues on the periphery". Books have been written on the topic of a 70 AD fulfillment of the coming of Christ in judgment, so it's no wonder that the author of this post is so vehement. There's too much to discuss. Anyway, I want to know what the truth is, so let's discuss it.
Christ said that the pharisees would see the coming of the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power and coming on the clouds of heaven. Since the clouds are an OT symbol of judgment, he basically said that the pharisees would see the judgment. I have come to believe that this was fulfilled when the pharisees saw the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD during the 3 1/2 year war with the Beast which was Rome (or more specifically, Emperor Nero). Any thoughts on this?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 9/2/2008 3:47:57 PM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1253
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
[quoteAny thoughts on this? ][/quote]
I'm hopping in on this (for some reason, reading 74 pages on the subject doesn't strike my fancy), but I was wondering: do you believe Christ will come again? If not, how do you believe this world will end?
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 9/3/2008 12:47:33 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 634
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:
Any thoughts on this? ]
I'm hopping in on this (for some reason, reading 74 pages on the subject doesn't strike my fancy), but I was wondering: do you believe Christ will come again? If not, how do you believe this world will end?
I'll confess, I didn't read anything but the last page to get a context for where the conversation was coming from. Apparently it hasn't gone anywhere for a while.
I do believe that Christ will come again. I believe that He'll come back with a shout and the dead will rise and we who are alive will meet Him in the air, and so shall we ever be with the Lord. I think that is all that we have yet to look forward to this side of judgment.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 9/3/2008 4:16:28 PM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1253
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
quote:
I do believe that Christ will come again. I believe that He'll come back with a shout and the dead will rise and we who are alive will meet Him in the air, and so shall we ever be with the Lord. I think that is all that we have yet to look forward to this side of judgment.
Well, if that's your view, then I certainly have no qualms with it. It's not one I personally ascribe to, but then, I'm not really sure what I personally ascribe to when ti comes to the end-times, except that, as you say, Christ is coming back.
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 9/3/2008 6:02:00 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 634
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:
I do believe that Christ will come again. I believe that He'll come back with a shout and the dead will rise and we who are alive will meet Him in the air, and so shall we ever be with the Lord. I think that is all that we have yet to look forward to this side of judgment.
Well, if that's your view, then I certainly have no qualms with it. It's not one I personally ascribe to, but then, I'm not really sure what I personally ascribe to when ti comes to the end-times, except that, as you say, Christ is coming back.
It's not a thoroughly thought out position, but I think it's the one that makes the most sense based on the fact that much of the prophecies are described as being "near" (perhaps 40 years?), unlike some of the Old Testament prophecies which were described as being "far off" (400 something years). I don't want to believe something that is not true, so if it can be demonstrated with scripture that the view I have just presented is wrong, I, Mr. Fribbles, have qualms with it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 9/8/2008 2:32:11 PM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 485
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JazZeke
As to the 70th week, the context, language and symbolism expounded by the very words of the texts concerns the covenant that Yahshua confirms at his advent, the end of the sacrifices and oblations due to said covenant and the resulting abominations of the high priests for their rejection of their Messiah.
I take some exception in saying that Jesus put forth with military might or strength any covenant which is limited in time.
While many people go on about how Jesus "confirmed" this or that, that word in translation does us a great disservice. While it may have worked in Shakespear's time, the present day connotation allows too many to make gabar mean something positive.
However, in the never-ending debate over eschatology, Preterists need a nice warm fuzzy word like 'confirm' to say it's all been done...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 9/9/2008 5:49:43 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 634
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sinner-Saint
quote:
ORIGINAL: JazZeke
As to the 70th week, the context, language and symbolism expounded by the very words of the texts concerns the covenant that Yahshua confirms at his advent, the end of the sacrifices and oblations due to said covenant and the resulting abominations of the high priests for their rejection of their Messiah.
I take some exception in saying that Jesus put forth with military might or strength any covenant which is limited in time.
While many people go on about how Jesus "confirmed" this or that, that word in translation does us a great disservice. While it may have worked in Shakespear's time, the present day connotation allows too many to make gabar mean something positive.
However, in the never-ending debate over eschatology, Preterists need a nice warm fuzzy word like 'confirm' to say it's all been done...
I don't feel like I particularly "need" any nice or fuzzy words. I want to understand what has happened and what is yet to happen. If the book of the Revelation and other unveilings refer to something that happened a long time ago, I'd like to know it. I don't particularly want to have a warm fuzzy, I want to know. So tell me why I need to believe that Nero was not the beast, and that his 3 1/2 year war was not the 3 1/2 year war of the Revelation, and why another temple needs to be built so it can be destroyed in fulfillment of prophecy.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Preterism vs. Futurism - One Stop Thread - 9/9/2008 9:07:16 PM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 485
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DanJames
I do believe that Christ will come again. I believe that He'll come back with a shout and the dead will rise and we who are alive will meet Him in the air, and so shall we ever be with the Lord. I think that is all that we have yet to look forward to this side of judgment.
Well that's all great and it will all come to pass, but it won't come to pass until the Restrainer is removed from the midst and the Man of Lawlessness is revealed.
As the anti-Christ will desecrate the Temple (2Th 2:4) with the Abomination (actually erected by the false prophet according to God in Rev 13) and Jesus said this would happen in the Holy place which as a place is in the Temple as the Bible defines that term.
So Nero is not the anti-Christ who will come, but he certainly may have been one of the five 'heads' who have fallen as the end-times comes to be because Nero never stood in the Temple nor did he have any image of himself erected there.
This still has to happen and it will happen at the midpoint of the one 'seven.'
P.S. I am unaware of any prophecy which stipulates that the third Temple has to be destroyed. The only prophecy concerning destruction of the sanctuary is in Daniel 9:26 and it was fulfilled in A.D. 70 by the Romans. This act of destruction points the way to the origin of the still future "ruler who will come." Nero committed suicide in A.D. 68.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Matt 24 study (cont'd) - 9/17/2008 10:29:24 PM
|
|
|
ChristopherJ
Posts: 227
Joined: 11/30/2007
From: Canada (The True North Strong and Free!)
Status: offline
|
When I first got saved about 18 years ago, I attended a church that was PDF in its eschatology (premillennial, dispensational and futurist). That was all I knew. However, as I studied the Scriptures on my own, studied church history, and read up on all of the different interpretations of the millennium and Revelation, I came to the conclusion that whatever I would believe, it would not be futuristic or dispensational, as those two seemed the most unbliblically sound of the bunch. I like both the preterist and continuous historicist positions on Revelation, and like both the postmill and amill positions. I am currently reading and studying through - verse by verse - the Book of Revelation, and just finished reading and studying Daniel 9:24-27, and Matthew 24. Here is a quote from my latest posted blog:
We have established that Daniel’s 70th week began at the inauguration of Jesus’ ministry in 27 AD, when He was anointed “Messiah the Prince” by John the Baptist. In the midst of this prophetic week, three and a half years later, the “Messiah was cut off” – that is, Jesus was crucified, in 30 AD... in my humble opinion, there is no solid Scriptural evidence to believe in a future ‘seven year tribulation’.
I would love to hear some feedback from the rest of you - especially those who may be PDF in your theology (premillennial, dispensational or futurist). Looking forward to discussing these things with you.
(You can check out my posts on Daniel 9:24-27 at: http://chris-jordan.blogspot.com/).
_____________________________
Chris Jordan
www.beausejourchurch.ca
http://thelandofpromise.blogspot.com/
(visit our website for free MP3 audio sermons, sermon notes, articles, devotionals and more).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Matt 24 study (cont'd) - 9/21/2008 9:31:07 AM
|
|
|
Sinner-Saint
Posts: 485
Joined: 10/5/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChristopherJ
We have established that Daniel’s 70th week began at the inauguration of Jesus’ ministry in 27 AD, when He was anointed “Messiah the Prince” by John the Baptist.
No you haven't.
Now I know of a reputable author who has shown that Jesus' baptism could be one of the fulfillments of when the Messiah would come which would complete the seven and sixty-two 'seven's as Gabriel foretod -
BUT that is not the only possible date.
The one I favor is Jesus' arrival in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday. Jesus says that day was a specical day so much so that if the people weren't rejoicing that the rocks would sing out!
I think we ought to pay attention to what Jesus says...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Matt 24 study (cont'd) - 10/7/2008 9:40:11 PM
|
|
|
Ntech
Posts: 65
Joined: 5/3/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChristopherJ
When I first got saved about 18 years ago, I attended a church that was PDF in its eschatology (premillennial, dispensational and futurist). That was all I knew. However, as I studied the Scriptures on my own, studied church history, and read up on all of the different interpretations of the millennium and Revelation, I came to the conclusion that whatever I would believe, it would not be futuristic or dispensational, as those two seemed the most unbliblically sound of the bunch. I like both the preterist and continuous historicist positions on Revelation, and like both the postmill and amill positions. I am currently reading and studying through - verse by verse - the Book of Revelation, and just finished reading and studying Daniel 9:24-27, and Matthew 24. Here is a quote from my latest posted blog:
We have established that Daniel’s 70th week began at the inauguration of Jesus’ ministry in 27 AD, when He was anointed “Messiah the Prince” by John the Baptist. In the midst of this prophetic week, three and a half years later, the “Messiah was cut off” – that is, Jesus was crucified, in 30 AD... in my humble opinion, there is no solid Scriptural evidence to believe in a future ‘seven year tribulation’.
I would love to hear some feedback from the rest of you - especially those who may be PDF in your theology (premillennial, dispensational or futurist). Looking forward to discussing these things with you.
(You can check out my posts on Daniel 9:24-27 at: http://chris-jordan.blogspot.com/).
Well, Let me point out how your premise is wrong. The 70th week never happened. Why??? You never considered the curse of Malachi.
Now let me point this curse out to you here.
Malachi 4.
5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.
Did this happen? According to Jesus Christ it did.
Matthew 17
11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.
14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
Now when it comes to curses Judaism has a section of the law specifically devoted to them. Leviticus 26 has the details in a nutshell. Also known as the old covenant it details the benefits of entering into a relationship with the God of the Jews. And the punishments when you break the laws and fall away from it.
A top level Leviticus 26 curse details that your country is conquered and your cities destroyed. The people are killed or taken away as slaves. However, no matter how long the curse it is guarenteed that once it is over the country will be restored. And if you look at the history of the Jews over the past 2000 years it appears it is following that plan.
So then the question is "Where is the declaration of the curse and it's length of time?" And I found that in the book of Hosea. The entire book in general but chapters 5 and 6 detail it specifically.
Hosea 5.
13 When Ephraim saw his sickness, and Judah saw his wound, then went Ephraim to the Assyrian, and sent to king Jareb: yet could he not heal you, nor cure you of your wound.
14 For I will be unto Ephraim as a lion, and as a young lion to the house of Judah: I, even I, will tear and go away; I will take away, and none shall rescue him.
15 I will go and return to my place, till they acknowledge their offence, and seek my face: in their affliction they will seek me early.
Hosea 6
1 Come, and let us return unto the LORD: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up.
2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.
3 Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the LORD: his going forth is prepared as the morning; and he shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the earth.
Leviticus 26
28 Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins.
If you look at the verbage used there in 5-14 and Leviticus 26-28 you can see that this is a prophecy that Israel and Judah would trigger a top level Leviticus 26 curse. But the length of time being 2 days makes no sense until you read it in context with 2nd Peter 3-8 which is derived from Psalms 90.
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
Those days are 1000 year periods of time. The curse of Malachi is 2000 years long.
Now read Matthew 27 and ask yourself what the fuss was all about. That was when the curse was applied. And that was the end of the 69th week.
< Message edited by Ntech -- 10/8/2008 10:44:22 PM >
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
