1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Preterism v. God's Plan for our future

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by Ed Edwards, Nov 25, 2004.

  1. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lastdazed: "Now then, your turn...
    Show me the scripture that supports your assertion that the 1st century Thessalonians are still being persecuted today."

    I hope you don't think i made that claim.
    YOur track record isn't very good, understanding wise.
    You gave 16 verses claiming:
    "The following is the ENTIRE body scriptures that mention the "parousia" by name. Note they all speak of the same event, the "ONE AND ONLY" parousia of Christ:"

    Yet none of the verses specifically mention that
    Christ is limited to one and only one coming [parousia].

    Here we go, Strong's G3952

    parousia
    par-oo-see'-ah
    From the present participle of G3918;
    a being near, that is, advent (often,
    return; specifically of Christ to punish
    Jerusalem, or finally the wicked);
    (by implication) physical aspect:
    - coming, presence.

    Even the definition mentions two different
    comingings of the Lord Jesus: one to
    punish Jerusalem and the second to
    punish the wicked at the end.

    4 posts up on page 8, i made a post showing the
    DIFFERENCES between the pretribulation parousia
    and the postribulation parousia of Jesus.
    YOu failed to dispute any of the details.
    Sorry, but you can never convince anybody of
    the fictional one&ONLYone parousia without
    scriputre. How can the two parousia be
    different yet the same? They are different,
    as i showed above. None of your scriptures
    say one and only one (I don't suppose God
    didn't know how to say "one and only one"
    when He wants to? -- NOT) The scriptural
    facts point to more than one parousia.

    [ January 31, 2005, 08:04 AM: Message edited by: Ed Edwards ]
     
  2. Lastdazed

    Lastdazed New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Prophetic time is always given to be understood by how time relates to man, not God. This is easily arrived at not by any previously held bias, but by comparing scripture with scripture.

    40 years = 40 human years
    7 years = 7 human years
    40 days & nights = 40 human days and nights
    7 days = 7 human days
    3 days = 3 human days
    far off = far off for humans
    a "long time" = a long time for hunans,
    therefore

    near = near to humans
    shortly = shortly to humans

    otherwise none of those clear time indicators can have any meaning at all.


    No longer can the nation of God/Christ be held physically captive as it could in OT times. Individual Christians can be held physically captive, but the nation is free and will forever remain so.

    This was in fact NOT true for OT Israel.

    In OT times, contrary to your assertion, the covenant nations was indeed "spiritually subject" to it's temporal enemies, as God willed when they failed to live up to their end of the relationship (which was often). Indeed, NEVER were they "Spiritually free", although they were physically free on ocassion.

    In the Christic Kingdom, God no longer physically or spiritually punishes His own covenant people. We are saved in spite of our sins. Any suffering we face is NOT punishement from God for our misbehaiving.


    But not the 1st century Thessalonain persecution PAul was addressing..... yes we can make a secondary application to us today in regards to GENERAL persecution, but it had PRIMARY application to the SPECIFIC Thessalonian persecution that would end via the Parousia and not before.... your contention mandates that after all persecuted Christians of all ages die, they continue to suffer their persecution in death until the parousia.
    I challenge that implication.

    Now then, explain to me in what way the verse about Timothy's soon arrival is applicable to you today. Primary or secondary... I don't care. You seem to be saying it isn't applicable to you at all, that it has no meaning or purpose for todays Christian, yet God preserved it in our scripture for some reason other than a history lesson, yes?

    You can't simultainously argue for relevance and insignificance of scripture, yet it appears this is your method here.

    If you agree it isn't "to you" How is Php 2:19 "For you" Eric? other than a history lesson of course.


    But it didn't really come to an end in AD70. It just changed from one group of persecutors (Jews) to another (Romans). [/quote]

    Paul wasn't addressing the future to them Roman persecution, but the Specific, then contemporary JEWISH persecution of the Thessalonains, which He promised would end via the Parousia of Christ.
    It did.


    Since you agree The SPECIFIC persecution Paul was addressing (the one thessalonains were suffering as Paul addressed them) has ended, and you belive the Parousia Paul promised would put it to an end has not yet come, then yes, you are saying it ended before the parousia, you are therfore arguing that Paul was wrong to say the parousia would be the event that brought their then contemporary persecution to an end.


    Again, Paul is not addressing "all trouble of all Christians" here, rather He is quite specific about the 1st century Thessalonain persecution. You have extrapolated it beyond the limit the text allows for, based only on your futurism.

    Here's your logic:

    Paul told the Thessalonains their persecution would end via the parousia,

    However Our persecution goes on......

    Therefore the parousia must not have come.

    Eric, Paul does not give any instruction that he is referring to "all Christian persecution of all time" in this verse. you have eisegetically arrived at that conclusion in the absense of scriptural instruction to do so. (was that redundant?).... only a futurist bias would mandate such a method.

    The NT saints had the Hope of being "caught up" if alive at the parousia. the OT saints did not.

    All shared the Hope of resurrection.

    You argument implies that all Christians who died prior to today, died having their hope of being caught up destroyed.

    Sorry, I don't follow you here... my view carries no such implication.

    You are the one who keeps saying "OVER and OVER". IT is not the same thing over and over, but rather is a COMMON event that is ONGOING.[/quote]


    I am not saying "over and over and " I'm saying "once for all time".

    Today, You are either "in Christ" or "in Adam".
    DNA plays no part in any sort of human seperation in Gods eyes any more. There is no Jew or Gentile in Christ or outside of Christ.
    There is saved, there is lost.


    ONLY the parousia could accomplish this "rest" whether it be physical or spiritual. Not death, not moving to Miami, only the parousia.

    Again, your view forces you to expand upon Pauls direct reference to include some later persecution Paul never mentioned.
     
  3. Lastdazed

    Lastdazed New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    As you have just demonstrated, Preterism has no monopoly on mixing spiritual and temporal meanings/fulfillments.

    Overboard spiritualization? LOL.

    so a little spiritualization os ok in your book?

    Look, the only spiritualization I arrive at is by comparing scripture with scripture.

    How do you arrive at your personal spiritualization?

    That would work, if it wasn't for the pesky fact that it is an Idea totally forign to Christ and the apostles.
    As I said, neither the OT prophets, NT apostles, nor Jesus himslef taught that the "stages" would extend beyond the messianic generation.


    As long as birth continues, and scripture testifies it continues in the New Heavens and earth time period (Is 65:17-15), sinners will exist on earth in need of Christ's intercession.

    Your view fails to account for the sinners who reside on the New Earth right outside the new Jerusalem's gates AFTER it has descended from Heaven and AFTER the beast, Satan and false prophet have been cast into the lake of fire.


    That ASSUMES that the bid to "come" is aimed at the people THEN. It looks to me, from the context, to be a bid to the READER of the book NOW (beginning with John's original readers, of course. Instead, we get the warning "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still". (22:11) meaning there is a cutoff point, and that one day, those outside will be forever barred outside, from the city (20:10, Jude 13, etc.)</font>[/QUOTE]Then, in your view, the timing of that cutoff point os not fortold. It must happen sometime AFTER Satan is cast into the lake of fire, for the spirit and Bride are still calling outside the gates to all who thirst to "come in and drink".

    Not exactly, I will enter heaven upon my death in my resurrection Body that God gives me upon the sowing of my natural body.

    By that logic, The Mormon religion proves futurism is false.

    Again, an Idea totally forign to Christ and the Apostles.

    That is not true. Humans are accountable to choose their master; either Satan or Christ. That is a ridiculous charge against futurism, though some people do get into blaming Satan too much for things. If there is no more Satan, then who are those who reject Christ under? Christ said everyone is under a master. There is no neutral ground. The preterists on the other board I have seen mentioning also believe unversal salvation. That is also consistent with your view that people are not under Satan.[/quote]

    I reject universalism myself, and you know good and well that universalism is not a preterist monopoly, so I fail to see your argument.

    I believes as the Bible states that the heart of man is wicked above all else (even Satan) and each man is tempted when he is drawn away by HIS OWN lusts.

    You have Humans incapable of sinning without Satan influencing them. Scripture teaches no such thing, indeed, consistant with your view, Humans don't need to believe on Christ at all, for as long as satan is out of the way, they will be sinless regardless of their belief.

    Cite this "actual experience" that proves to you Satan is currently atacking Christians.

    I make no such claim, nor have I ever.
    Lets stick to the claims I HAVE made, OK?

    Highly debatable does not equate with proof. Have you "SEEN" a demon posessed person yourself? Who's eyes have you personally looked into where you were 100% certain they were posessed ny demons, with no other possible explaination for their ocular oddities?

    [qoute} So this would not help the full preterist, unless you conclude it is all their imagination, like the skeptics do. There may be many abuses of the concepts of spiritual warfare and claims of exorcism and "binding" demons in many charismatic churches and some cults, but this does not mean all spiritual warfare is phony.[/quote]

    So, you can't prove it, rather you suspect it.
    OK. That's what I thought.


    You are either in Christ, or in Adam by your own accountable choice.
    The Devil has no power over that decision.


    Show me the scriptyure that says Satan can not exert influence over individual humans from the lake of fire.

    He can't decieve entire nations anymore, as He did in OT times, but I find no scripture that says Satan would one day be prevented from tempting individual sinners.
     
  4. Lastdazed

    Lastdazed New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your view mandates it.

    The resurrection occurs at the second coming (1 Cor 15:23)

    The judgment occurs at the second coming (2 Tim 4:1; Rev 11:15-18)

    The New Heaven/Earth occurs at the "thief's coming," the "day of the Lord" (2 Pet 3:10/1 Thess 5:2)

    It's one event Ed.
     
  5. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lastdazed: "Your view mandates it."

    Sorry, Sir -- you have no right to tell me what
    my view requires. You hardly have the ability
    to tell what your view requires.

    Lastdazed speaking of Satan: "He can't decieve entire
    nations anymore, as He did in OT times,"

    And you have been locked up where?
    And how long since you read a newspaper or
    a history book (or internet equivalent)?
    Satan is NOT bound today (i haven't looked at
    the TV this morning, but for sure i know
    Satan wasn't bound yesterday, Sunday)

    Lastdazed: "The resurrection occurs at the second coming (1 Cor 15:23)"

    Do i need to repeat my post called
    "The Five Resurrections"? That post delineates
    five different resurections two of which are
    general resurrections of the just neither of
    which have happened yet.

    Lastdazed: "The judgment occurs at the second coming (2 Tim 4:1; Rev 11:15-18)"

    Do I need to repeat my post called
    "The Five Judgments"? That post delineates
    the WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHY, WHERE differences that
    made each of the judgements unique hense not
    the same. Two or more of them require additional
    comings of Jesus.

    God's nature is as a resurrecting God - please don't
    limit His Christ to one and only one additional
    resurrection of the just.

    Lastdazed: //"The New Heaven/Earth occurs at the "thief's coming," the "day of the Lord" (2 Pet 3:10/1 Thess 5:2)//

    The 2 Peter 3:10 "Day of the Lord" is 1,000 earthman's
    years long (see 2 Peter 3:8). And you can't even give
    me one each 7-year "day" in which the Lord comes.
    Come on the coming of the Lord at the beginning of
    the Tribulation period 7-year-day and the coming
    of the LOrd at the end of the Tribualtion period to
    to tear-up-Jack-(Satan) and begin a physical Millinnial
    Kingdom of Christ in a physcial Jerusalem ruling
    from the physical throne of David ruling a physical
    world -- these comings happen the same "day" (but
    not the same 8-hour-work-shift-day).

    Lastdazed: It's one event Ed."

    Amen, brother -- Preach it!
    It all happens on the same 7-year-day but
    not the same 12-hour-period-of-light-day.
     
  6. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    God's plan for our future:
    Give us this day our daily bread, and Come, Lord Jesus, come!
     
  7. Eric B

    Eric B Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 26, 2001
    Messages:
    4,838
    Likes Received:
    5
    And part of what was to be accomplished in that "near" or "shortly" period was the subjection of the nations. Now your position says that may be fully "applied" in thousands or tens of thousands of years to come "Who knows...?" that site said!). So in any case, "shortly" must be stretched. Only you actually stretch it firther than most futursists in that case.
    spiritually subject? I'm not sure what you mean by that. It seems if they were spiritually subject; they would be bound; by God to adopt that nation's religion. But that was strictly forbidden.
    In the OT, it was the same as what you said for the NT. Individual Israelites could be held captive (as apart of the captive physical nation), but those who gave their hearts to the Lord were still free of the spiritual drkness of both the conquering pagans and the nominal/disobedient Israelites.
    And we were talking about the reign of a king; not necesarily even the people. Christ (as the God of the OT) certainly was not subject to (and thus still ruled over) the pagans even though He may have used them to punish His people with captivity.

    1)No, as individuals, their suffering ends when they die; but other Christians continue in the same circumstances, to the present, and the future return of Christ.
    2)Let's cut to the chase. The argument here is basically WHAT is "primary application", and WHAT is "secondary". Php 2:19 is obviously primary only. Timotheus no longer lives and is sent to churches, and Paul isn't around to send him or pray that he goes. So what you're doing is generalizing this, and saying "well, if that is 'TO' them only, then the parousia statements are 'TO' them only also". OTher passages on suffering; then you admit "well, we can take them secondarily and 'glean' from them". But while they may have immediately referred to that particular group of persecutors; this does not prove then that " only this particular "contemporory" PERSECUTION is ended by the Parousia". To try to maintain this, you then come up with this idea that the Thessalonians should "still be suffering" if the parousia has not occurred. But that is only with a preassumption of a past invisible Parousia. If this passage has any "secondary application" at all, then so must the parousia it speaks of. That is precisely why the propecies are dual. Else (3), the passages are no more "for" us than the Phil. verse, whichbasically to us, IS "history", and there is nothing we can even "glean" from it for ourselves. In your view (if consistent), EVERYTHING becomes like this verse, but you don;lt want to take it that far; only as far as necessary to eliminate the doctrine that you are against, and that is a literal future resurrection and return of Christ.
    But that persecution was APART of "all trouble of all Christians", and only with an assumption of an AD70 Parousia can you exclude all other trouble as applying in principle. But then what can we even "glean" from this, then? Christ has already done everything He is going to do on earth, and our only remaining hope is "dying", and leaving other generations of Christians behind to suffer forever.
    Actually, it is not even as "specific" as you insist! We only know Paul was speaking about Thessalonian persecution because it is the letter to the Thessalonians. It doesn't even speciy "Jewish" persecutors at all! All the yearss reading of this, I thought it was mostly Roman persecutors. Who was doing the persecuting wasn;t even the point. The point was "...the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his
    mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of
    his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day". (v.8-10). This does NOT specify "this is punishment for THAT PARTICULAR persecution ONLY"; but rather appears to be a general punishment of whatever perecutors of Christians were alive when Christ did return.
    Well, apparently they did. If this book was written in around the 50's; that was a good 15 or more years before AD70. Of both the Thessalonians, and their persecutors; not all would even live that long. So it must be general, and not referring to a specific group of individuals. No one individual was guaranteed to be there and "caught up" then. "those of us" meaning "christians", and it didn't even include Paul who wrote that very first person plural, as he died before that!
    In your view, the New Covenant had not even begun yet. That means, the 27 books following Malachi are apart of the Old Testament. We should have some true, post-Parousia "New Testament"s criptures, then, that lay out the truth of the new Kingdom. Instead, we are only left to "glean" from passages that have no bearing on us at all, as they were in this "transition" period that was still really apart of the prior covenant.
    I'm not saying you said that; it is you who accuse me of saying things are fulfilled "over and over". But that is not what my view says either; only how you interpret it.
    But what the classifications are TODAY is not really the point. In your view, only the Jewish nation was punished, back when that was still a separation. Regardless of whether there is Jew and Gentile today, still, the prophecies show the rest of the nations being punished as well. This was written back when the Temple was still standing, so there was still "Jew and Gentile", so THAT is why I specify the "gentile" world (i.e. the rest of the world remains to be judged.
    So that would mean they still suffer persecution even when they are dead! :eek: This obviously cannot be. In Rev. 6:11, martyred saints are told "rest yet for a little season, until their fellow servants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled".
     
  8. Eric B

    Eric B Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 26, 2001
    Messages:
    4,838
    Likes Received:
    5
    Problem is; You do the spiritualizing first (to conform to past fulfillment); then "compare" the "spiritual" interpretation. I take them for what they say. for instance, the statement of mine that you just used regarding "the spiritual coming The spiritual "coming" of Christ to the Church was the Holy Spirit in AD30 or 33. That was the beginning of their spiritual life" is based on comparing scriptures that show that Christ said He would "come to them" and be with them through the "Comforter", and that anyone who believed in Christ at the time the epistles addred to them was written was already "born from above", and spiritually alive. I don't reinterpret the scriptures first, then "compare" them and watch as my view naturally falls into place.
    You assume that; just as people back then assumed Messiah would only come once. Once again, you are taking the time statements; and then separating the rest of Church history from "that generation". Even "generation" is relative, because many of the people responsible for crucifying Christ would be long gone by AD70, and a their children would be born, and grow old, and their children be of age by that time (I think 40 was generally "old" until modern times). So once again, it cannot be about a set of individual people.
    So God punishes people in this "new earth" (New Covenant) for breaking the Kosher Laws? I thought that passed with the Old Covenant.
    No, that was a conditional picture of the Kingdom with only one coming of the Messiah, accpted by and ruling thorugh physical Israel, under the Old Covenant. (So I disagree with those futurists (Dispys) who use this very passage to teach the OC will be reinstituted then, as preterists always criticize). Of course we know it did not work out that way, so this cannot be used by either preterist of futurist as an accurate picture of life in the New Heaven.

    And where do you get this from? Popular folklore? What I see is a physical world God created physical beings in, and sin brought about a fall, and a need for renewal. Even that was basically remedial. NEVER in Genesis do we see death portrayed in such a good light. NEVER is the physical decay and pains of the body and aging seen as "good as God created it". "Returning to the dust" was clearly apart of the curse! Only in the NT, do we see "death is gain", and that came as part of salvation, and even that would only lead to a resurrection, and some would not tste of it, but be caught away at Christ's return.
    You're still ASSUMING that that call to "come" was aimed at the people in the storyline; rather than the READERS throughout all time (before Christ returns and it is all finished). Notice, the storyline has ended way before that. It basically ends at v.5. Then, we have John's account of his interaction with the angel. V.11 would refer back to the storyline; because it would make no sense for them to be telling people to stay unholy! (Preterists claim this only is used to illustrate how short the time was; but thst still does not make sense. If it was so "at hand"; then people should all the more hurry and become righteous! But even if that were true; it would further prove my point that the storyline has ended before this!). So next follows some messages from Jesus, and some warnings, and another promise to come quickly. All of this is directed to the one readingit; for it would make no sense to warn the ones afterwards, already in the Kingdom about having their name removed from the book of life or the plagues WRITTEN IN THE BOOK added to them!
    And Corinthians shows that that is the SAME body that was sown; glorified; just like Christ's. The tomb was empty when He rose.
    No, because if all the promises apply to this current world we are in, then if you were consistent, you would conclude that there might not be anything after this. This is all that was promised; and all we need. You basically have to "reserve" some passages that if you interpreted the same way as other passages; they too would apply to this world. I only mentioned those other preterists because they are consistent.
    Once again, I mention them because they are consistent. If all the prophecies of revelation refer to AD70, then so do all the pictures of fiery punishment (which obviously could be seen to refer to the war). "Gehenna" was a burning garbage pit outside oof Jerusalem. This "lake of fire" would obviously refer to that state of destruction as well. You yourself continuously apply "outside the city" as a spiritual condition of people today. Well, that is the "lake of fire", and if that is true, then there is no "hell" after this! Hell is the state of unbelief or "spiritual death" of unbelievers in the world today; and this is precisely how those people I mentioned take it!
    Boy, and I thought Stevie Wonder was so unbiblcal when he sang that Satan is filled with wrath at the evils of Apartheid, which he himself frowns on! (rather than being the one who deceives men into doing this and "think[ing] they do God service"). According to you, he must have been right. But then, once again, why is he pictured as the one who led man to falling the first place? (and not just fall into the Old Covenant; but rather into total lawlessness?). Both in this, and physical death/decay; preterism ignores the Fall.
    Never said any of that. In the Millennium, Satan is removed, and people live peaceably unde Christ's rule; but in the end; there are still many who are not saved. There is still sin in their hearts; and when Satan is released again, then they make their final move. So no, sin is not removed without Satan; only suppressed. This is just the final stage of God's history lesson. God was doing everything that man thinks is the key to a perfect world. First, he wiped out the whole world, and started over with a righteous man (Noah). But then wickedness quickly sprung up again. Then he brought forth a physical nation to be His Kingdom, and gave them more and more laws, but they too only rebelled and broke the covenant, and killed their Messiah. It became obvious through all this that the problem was in man, not in the environment. So now He starts a spiritual Kingdom to get people preprared for the final eternal Kingdom. Still, there is sin and imperfection. Men would continue to blame bad environments and governments. So one last step is to give them that perfect government and environment they wanted. This goes all well, but at the end, people still rebel. It is the final lesson about man, to man.
    You think that man's sin is either Satan OR man himself; but it is both. Anyone following Satan is following their own sin, and anyone driven by their sin is under Satan.
    The fact that all those scriptures about resisting him and how he puts thoughts into our minds (that did not come from us) are still true for us.
    Well I didn't know whether you did or not, so in case you did; I answered it. (I thought that would be the only way they could prove that Satan was on the earth before AD70, but not after. So how do you prove that then?)
    I don't have that gift of pereception. Not all do. I am very intellectual; and don't usually pick up those things. But others (including some around me) do; and I cannot dismiss their claims. They even note the difference in the eyes of the Son of Sam when he was first caught, with now; that he has professed Christ.
    I suspect it in some people; not all. Some are clearly phony. Not all; though the preterist is forced by his view to say that they all are.
    He has no power over those who have made the decision to be in Christ. Can you show where it is ever said that those outside of Christ are now freed from the power of Satan?
    So now you're admitting that he "can" still exert influence over people? Then why argue that people under this "influence" are only "in Adam"; but not in Satan's power? You're not even being consistent here. The lake of fire signifies the total separation of sin and sinners from the presence of God and His saints. Once again; you're in a bind; because you can try to say that this is our protection in Christ now (while the sinners are in the lake of fire with him); but then you have just symbolized away the lake of fire; and with it the doctrine of Hell!
    What are "nations", but large consists of individual sinners?
     
  9. Ed Jones

    Ed Jones New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    Checkmate!

    Eric do you play chess? If you do, I'd bet you are pretty good at it...

    Ed
     
  10. Eric B

    Eric B Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 26, 2001
    Messages:
    4,838
    Likes Received:
    5
    My father taught me when I was young.
     
  11. Ed Jones

    Ed Jones New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought so...

    Well done!

    Ed
     
Loading...