Soonness: A fact that needs to be dealt with

I will try.
　

Fact? Any proof or are we all just to take your word for it?

Tell me, how many and where are they.

Types and shadows are found in the OT, not the NT. The prophesies pointed to this event. Are there any OT prophesies you believe point to AD70?
　

No, how you think scripture says they will come to pass.
　

Coming in the clouds is a Hebrew idiom found throughout the OT. You can continue to ignore that but it doesn't change the FACT. It is up to you to demonstrate that the NT prophets intended the language to be understood differently than how the OT prophets used it.

Then Peter was wrong:
1Pe 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.
　
The "end", was the end of the Mosaic economy.

Using your method, you cannot know when it is near or at hand. People have been predicting this "end" all throughout Church history. In my own lifetime scholar after scholar has said His coming was near. Apparently you seem to be saying you will know, so can you tell us with current events, is His coming near? Yes or No? If you can't answer definitively one way or the other, my point is proven.
　

Once again you have defeated your own argument. The NT writers believed and taught the near coming of Jesus. However you say they were WRONG! What else were these supposedly inspired writers wrong about?

Now you believe all the apostles and their disciples believed Jesus was coming back in their lifetime. Why??? Is it their words that led you to believe this? Yet it is these very words you say must be taken in "context". Did the all the inspired apostles take "near" and "at hand" out of their context like us preterist do?
　

What prophecies did they see fulfilled?
　

They DID see those things! Gill, Spurgeon, Barnes, Clarke all understood this.

Thomas Newton
"Our Saviour proceedeth in the same figurative style, ver. 30 - ' And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven; and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.' The plain meaning of it is, that the destruction of Jerusalem will be such a remarkable instance of divine vengeance, such a signal manifestation of Christ's power and glory, that all the Jewish tribes shall mourn, and many will be led from thence to acknowledge Christ and the Christian religion. In the ancient prophets, God is frequently described as coming in the 'clouds' upon any remarkable interposition and manifestation of his power; and the same description is here applied to Christ. The destruction of Jerusalem will be as ample a manifestation of Christ's power and glory as if he was himself to come visibly in the clouds of heaven." (ibid., p. 408-409)
　

Mat 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

The inspired NT writers disagree with you. They loudly proclaimed it was near.

Jas 5:8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.
1Pe 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Rev 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
　
FF Bruce:
"The phrase "this generation" is found too often on Jesus' lips in this literal sense for us to suppose that it suddenly takes on a different meaning in the saying we are now examining. Moreover, if the generation of the end-time had been intended, 'that generation' would have been a more natural way of referring to it than 'this generation. (The Hard Sayings of Jesus, p. 227)

　

 

Once again I quote Gill:

There were others also besides these, that set up for deliverers, who called themselves by the name of the Messiah. Among these, we may reckon Simon Magus, who gave out that he was some great one; yea, expressly, that he was the word of God, and the Son of God (e), which were known names of the Messiah; and Dositheus the Samaritan, asserted himself to be Christ (f); and also Menander affirmed, that no man could be saved, unless he was baptized in his name (g); these are instances before the destruction of Jerusalem, and confirm the prophecy here delivered.

"... from the death of Herod the Great.. to the destruction of the Temple, the Jewish History is filled with the names of false Christs and false prophets who deceived both the Jews and Samaratins. None appeared before this period, and not more than one for five or six centuries after it." (Kett, 3rd Edit. vol I, o. 168)

Thomas Newton
For very soon after our Saviour's decease appeared Simon Magus, Acts viii. 9, 10,-- ' and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one: to whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying This man is the great power of God! He boasted himself likewise among the Jews, as the Son of God. Of the same stamp and character was also Dositheus the Samaritan, who pretended that he was the Christ foretold by Moses.

Do you still refute this? If so why? Are you married to your view so much?

You read your interpretation into the text. The Roman Empire was made up of many nations.

"So Vitellius prepared to make war with Aretas, having with him two legions of armed men... but when on the fourth day letters came to him, which informed him of the death of Tiberius, he obliged the multitude to take an oath of fidelity to Caius; he also recalled his army, and made them every one go home..."
(Josephus, The Antiquities Of The Jews, 18:5:3)

"And now it was that a great sedition arose between the Jews that inhabited Cesarea, and the Syrians who dwelt there also... they came to throwing stones at one another; and several were wounded, and fell on both sides, though still the Jews were the conquerors. But when Felix saw that this quarrel was become a kind of war, he came upon them on the sudden, and desired the Jews to desist; and when they refused so to do, he armed his soldiers, and sent them out upon them, and slew many of them..."
(Josephus, The Antiquities Of The Jews, 20:8:7)

"The history on which I am entering is that of a period rich in disaster, terrible with battles, torn by civil struggles, horrible even in peace. Four emperors fell by the sword, there were three civil wars, more foreign wars, and often both at the same time."
(Tacitus, The Histories, 1:2)

Gill
Poor blinded creatures! when these very things were the forerunners of their destruction. And so it was, the Jewish nation rose up against others, the Samaritans, Syrians, and Romans: there were great commotions in the Roman empire, between Otho and Vitellius, and Vitellius and Vespasian; and at length the Romans rose up against the Jews, under the latter, and entirely destroyed them; compare the writings in 2 Esdras:
"And one shall undertake to fight against another, one city against another, one place against another, one people against another, and one realm against another.'' (2 Esdras 13:31)

Then Peter was WRONG!
1Pe 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

It was the Roman Empire, not the Roman nation.

http://www.freegrace.net/gill/

Like Thomas Ice?

http://www.preteristvision.org/articles/on_thin_ice.html

Ice like you, also likes to read into the text.

http://books.google.com/books?id=x02OxlzbNt0C&pg=PA179&lpg=PA179&dq=Thomas+Ice,+this+generation&source=bl&ots=s_7PisqS6P&sig=qZbldRDmMsgrysiQXznXbGVA6gM&hl=en&ei=y0S1S-yfHZKuNtDXlPIJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CBsQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Thomas%20Ice%2C%20this%20generation&f=false

You have clinched it for my position and history has clinched it for my position. Sure you don't want to discuss further verse 14?

 

This is what I have found to be common (not a dig at you but in general) when one spiritualizes scripture to often. The don't take into account the context and what is supposed to be imagry and what is supposed to be literal.
First, I never stated that Jesus was going to come back on a literal cloud, I was merely quoting the passage. The imagry of clouds with respect to God ALWAYS refers to His majesty (being far above all things), His might (no one can stop the storms), ect.. The imagry of the cloud is representitive of God's coming as well as how He will come - quickly. Jesus return is distinctly different than your Isa passage because scripture tells us He will physically return again, even the angels who were there at His ascension stated - "this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven"

How was He recieved into heaven, according to the on lookers - "while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight."
While Jesus 'might' have been using OT imagry concerning His literal return, it is logical to assume, based off the angels testimony, that His return will be like His ascension and that means coming in the clouds, which also received Him out of their sight.

Second - Other than that minor quaff you made I'm not sure why you quoted the above passage. The judgment, as stated in the scripture, was against Egypt itself and thus God states - Egyptians against Egyptians. And since Egypty was known as a single people group it was also known to be divided into both the Lower and Upper Egypt groups. This is not the same with the Roman Empire which was one kingdom, comprised of different people groups. It was one nation comprised of conquered nations who lost their soveriegnty and rule.

 

That would be appreciated.

Read up on it. It isn't just my, it's been around for centuries.

Since this is a known fact to the vast majority of bible students, I will assume you are kidding here. However if you aren't then it would be prudent to study it out a bit more for your benifit, if for nothing else, debates such as these.
One such example was the OT prophecy of the birth of the messiah via a virgin from the book of Isaiah. This prophecy specifically dealt with with regard to/for King Ahaz. If there is no 'dual' prophecy then the prophetic view that Jesus must be born of a virgin, is a contrived man-made view.

Some other examples (and there are many)from here:

Not with respect to prophecy. Yes, some prophecies did speak to that event. I have not denied this, but that does not negate the point being made that the prophetic point listed in Mat 24 are all fullfilled in 70 ad. The biggest proof there is to this is that Jesus has not yet come back. Scriptrure immediately after those tribulation... he will come back.

I would like to know from you, how come Jesus did not fufill not only His promise but prophecy, that at the end of the tribulation (70ad) Jesus would return? Where is He?

You really don't understand do you? You make us stuff and then make your arguement, not against my points, but your own contrived assumption.

First, show me where I said Jesus must float down on a cloud. I was merely quoting the verse in my explanation. It is not a fact I ignore, I just assumed others already knew this and figured I didn't have teach about idoms and that 'this' idiom doesn't affect Jesus statement that He will return [bodily]. To requote what I have already stated to astrictom:
The imagry of clouds with respect to God ALWAYS refers to His majesty (being far above all things), His might (no one can stop the storms), ect..

*Sigh.. It isn't all that difficult to understand and no, Peter was not wrong.

But you do make me a little worried. I stated "

"
To which you state - "Then Peter was wrong:"

Are you arguing that Jesus HAS ALREADY come?
I hope that isn't you view.

However as I said, no Peter isn't wrong, you just aren't reading it in relation to Jesus own statements. When these things are happening (vs 6 of Mat 24) the end is near, because these things are part of what must happen before Jesus returns. Thus when they begin, though in the beginning the end is still some way off, it is still understood that the 'end - is at hand' or is definately on it's way.

Here is a fact that you have yet to deal with. Jesus stated that immediately at the end of the tribulation (which ended in 70 ad or there abouts) He would return. Where is His return? Again - It has been just over 2000 years since you say (and also Full Prets), they have been fulfilled but still there is not nor has there been, an end - [we know this because there was] no Jesus coming as was prophesied.

The 'and then' translates simply the very next thing as it is a continuation of events, one after another (like domino's). What gives the 'and then' the immediacy of the next even stems from the intial marker of these events in verse 29 - immediately after..

Are you saying He has already come?
Scripture tells us to be in that state of antisipation of His appearing. They are correct, like the apostles to continually state (and have been stating for just over 2000 years) the end is near. Just as Noah preached every day 120 years - end is near/the judgment of God is coming, Jesus tells us it will be just like those days (the days of Noah). Much like the apostles states of those days where they say - where is the promise of His coming?

We know the end is near because prophecy is not yet fulfilled for IF it were then IMMEDIATELY...Jesus would come.

Why is it you make stuff up as you go along. Deal with what "I" said and not your assuptions and made up arguments in 'your' head.
I didn't say I know the 'day' when He will come because Jesus even told us He didn't know the day nor the hour of His coming but to be watchful of the signs. By these we know the time is drawing closer.

Is the end near - YES! because scripture/prophesy is not yet fulfilled. Since Christ has not come, we KNOW this.

Once again you speak without understanding. Read the above. It isn't complicated but is simply biblical and easy to grasp.

Some of those already mentioned.　

 

Yes, they saw some being fulfilled but not all, and of those we see dual fulfillment as well. Again and agian, no one is denying this. Please deal with what is said and not your imagination.

　
Sorry but Newton did a very poor Job here. The text states ALL the tribes of the earth (meaning all mankind) and Newton ascribes this to only the Jews - all the tribes of the Hebrews.
Secondly, that the destruction was a sign that Christ had come. He seems to forget about The sign of the Son of Man in heaven as well from which all the tribes will mourn, and they will SEE the Son of Man 'Coming'... with power and glory.

Not after the destruction they percieve this was God and only Jews mourned, after all these things, thinking this must be Jesus who did this.
That was very funny though, Thank you.

 

Hi Grasshopper, I hope you and yours are all well.

I admire your tenacity.

Step away from your point of view for just a moment.
Look at this Scripture and there is a simple yet sublime answer (from my point of view) to your question concerning why these men were wrong (assuming that Jesus Christ indeed has not yet returned):

Luke 10

32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
33 Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.
34 For the Son of man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch.
35 Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning:
36 Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping.
37 And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.​

We just don't know when it will be.​

Another Scripture even presents the idea of a "delayed" coming​

Luke 12

40 Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not.
41 Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?
42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?
43 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
44 Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.
45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.​

I believe it was RC Sproul (non-dispensational) acknowledges the following difficulty with preterism:

The Times of the Gentiles.

Matthew 24
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.​

The prophecies of astronomical and geological "signs" of 25-28 will not happen "until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled".​

Romans 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.​

Since the "fulness of the gentiles" is a mystery (unrevealed) until it happens in actuality, we don't know when it will occur either.

One thing we do know: Israel is still being "trodden down" by the "Goyim" of both Chistendom and Islam with the Temple site and other holy places of Judaism under the control of Christians and Moslems.

Admittedly verses Matthew 24:25-27 can be looked at as metaphor and/or imagery but the word "signs" (IMO) give greater credence to a literal view especially since "signs in the sun" is given the locative form.

HankD​

 

Allan, at it's best, this 'explaining away', this 'dance', you're doing is extremely weak.

“1 (1) WHEREAS the war which the Jews made with the Romans hath been the greatest of all those, not only that have been in our times, but, in a manner, of those that ever were heard of; both of those wherein cities have fought against cities, or nations against nations; ......
2 Now at the time when this great concussion of affairs happened, the affairs of the Romans were themselves in great disorder. Those Jews also who were for innovations, then arose when the times were disturbed; they were also in a flourishing condition for strength and riches, insomuch that the affairs of the East were then exceeding tumultuous, while some hoped for gain, and others were afraid of loss in such troubles; for the Jews hoped that all of their nation which were beyond Euphrates would have raised an insurrection together with them. The Gauls also, in the neighborhood of the Romans, were in motion, and the Geltin were not quiet; but all was in disorder after the death of Nero.....” - Josephus, preface to WARS OF THE JEWS

“On the 19th of December a.d. 69, the Roman Capitol, with its ancient sanctuaries, was set on fire. Eight months later, on the 9th of Ab a.d. 70, the Temple of Jerusalem was given to the flames. It is not a coincidence but a conjunction, for upon the ruins of heathenism and of apostate Judaism was the Church of Christ to be reared.” - Edersheim

“………civil commotions and international feuds, were rife in those days, especially between the Jews and their neighbours. In Alexandria, in Selucia, in Syria, in Babylonia, there were violent tumults between the Jews and the Greeks, the Jews and the Syrians, inhabiting, the same cities. 'Every city was divided,' says Josephus, 'into two camps.' In the reign of Caligula great apprehensions were entertained in Judea of war with the Romans, in consequence of that tyrant's proposal to place his statue in the temple. In the reign of the Emperor Claudis (A.D. (41-54), there were four seasons of great scarcity. In the fourth year of his reign the famine in Judea was so severe, that the price of food became enormous and great numbers perished. Earthquakes occurred in each of the reigns of Caligula and Claudius.”-Russell

Christ, The Prophet, was speaking to the Jews, and telling them what was going to happen to THAT GENERATION OF JEWS......but believe what you want Allan. Keep up the dance, keep on explaining it away. It won't stop this preterist roller coaster. Folks are waking up.

 

Hi Tom,

I have a few questions for you and any full preterist concerning this material universe.

These are sincere questions and not meant to trip anyone up or to take an opportunity to belittle the answers (although there might be a challenge).

My presumption is that full preterists believe in a resurrection.

Will the resurrected child of God have a "spritual" body or does it include a material body as Jesus had, able to eat and drink?

Will the material universe go on forever in the corruption of Romans 8 or will there be an eternal state where what is called "entropy" by science or "sin and death" by Scripture will cease?

Romans 8

20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.​

A rather course scientific definition of "entropy" is sometimes called "the heat death of the universe" where all the energy of the universe is dissipated and the universe returns to ????

If sin and death come to an end, what will that transition look like and what are the events accompanying that transition.

What Scripture do you use as a description of that transition?

The reason I ask is that I have confusion concerning the preterist belief of the resurrection of the body and the nature of the eternal state (and the transition from mortal to eternal).

One preterist disclaimed 2 Peter 3 as that description:

2 Peter 3

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?​

This was a surprise to me and I have wondered concerning these things giving rise to the questions I am asking above. Can you or anyone help. ​

There will be no ridicule from me but perhaps more questions and maybe even a challenge.​

Thanks
HankD​

 

Baptists dont dance.

 

What Preterists conveniently overlook is that when the Lord Jesus returns, it is to save his people and re-establish his kingdom, not destroy it. There are dozens of prophesies in the OT where God promises to gather his people from the four corners of the earth and they will dwell in safety forever. This is the 2nd coming.

Jer 32:37 Behold, I will gather them out of all countries, whither I have driven them in mine anger, and in my fury, and in great wrath; and I will bring them again unto this place, and I will cause them to dwell safely:
38 And they shall be my people, and I will be their God:
39 And I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them:
40 And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.

This is just one of many OT prophesies where God promises to gather the Jews back to their country and they will dwell in safety and peace forever.

Did Jesus re-establish his kingdom in 70 A.D.? No, the Jews were dispersed into all the world. It is only in this century that they have been brought back and have a homeland again. But do they dwell in peace and safety? No, that has not been fulfilled yet.

You teach the opposite of what the scriptures say, Jesus is returning to deliver and save his people, not destroy them.

 

Not good, at least

 

You meant to say "well" didn't you?

Now, here is some bad dancing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwVa06LSlxk&feature=related

 

Heheh, you all speak for yourselves..... ......the wife and I both came from dancing families, two stepping, clogging, square dancing; we even took ball room dancing years ago....... we're not bashful about 'cutting a rug'........ Ah, the childhood memories of those bluegrass shindigs; the old and young alike danced.


[edit] I just watched that video Winman; ours twern't nothing like that.........

 

You Preterists still haven't answered what I said. When Jesus comes again it is to save the Jews, not destroy them. There are dozens of prophesies concerning this in the OT.

Zech 14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
6 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.
8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.
9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.
10 All the land shall be turned as a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem: and it shall be lifted up, and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin's gate unto the place of the first gate, unto the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king's winepresses.
11 And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

When Jesus comes he will fight against the nations that come against Jerusalem, not destroy it. The mount of Olives will divide in two and allow the Jews a way to escape these advancing armies. When Jesus destroys these armies then Jerusalem will see no more utter destruction but will be safely inhabited (vs. 11)

Even you Preterists cannot say this happened in 70 A.D.

 

Yes, in their day the worst thing that had ever happened to the Jews was the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.. But I would bet if all of these men would have seen the Holocaust of this last century where over six million Jews were gassed, baked in ovens, ripped apart for medical experiments, and starved to death for years in concentration camps, they would quickly change their former opinions.

You seem to believe that just because certain men believed that the tribulation occured in the 1st century it must be true. But the problem still is, the scriptures clearly show the Lord is coming to save his people, not destroy them.

Zech 12:8 In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.
9 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

I guess the Lord didn't do a very good job of defending Jerusalem as he promised to do if your doctrine is correct. He didn't destroy the armies that came against Jerusalem also.