Featured Rapture in 70 AD

HankD how long have we been doing this? :love2:
So are you admitting you don't take the nature meaning when it comes to those very time statements?

I'll ask you, since Peter gets his New H&E from is. 65-66, do you take those passages literally?

Why not quote verse 8? Oh, I know why.

 

Thank you for that wonderful example of futurist out-of-context proof-texting. In verse 16, he says "but THIS is.." The "this" was everything that was happening in the preceding 15 verses. Let's try reading verse 15 & 16 as though they were actually meant to be one continuous thought & message.

"For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day but this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel"

Wow! Did you see that?! When kept in context with the rest of the passage, the object of verse 16 is made as crystal clear. Want to see something else really cool? The passage says that God would pour out His Spirit on their sons & daughters so that they would all prophecy. And wouldn't you know it? That's exactly what happened in the First Century Church.

"And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy" (Acts 21:9)
"And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets" (1 Cor 12:28)

Is this another case of the God messing up another time statement(according to futurists)? When He said that He has set prophets in the Church, surely what He really meant to say was "will set prophets in the Church after the rapture"...oh, wait, that can't be right. How can the church prophecy on earth if they're no longer here? Too bad we don't have a record of any time in the past where His Spirit was poured out on mankind, children prophesied, & great signs & wonders were performed by the Church; just as was prophecied. Man, I hope God didn't get His time statement wrong & that Luke didn't lie about the fulfillment of that prophecy at Pentecost. Oh well, I guess I have two choices before me. I can either believe the futurist view which makes God grammatically & contextually inept & Luke a liar, or I can believe that the Word of God is true as written.

Christ's Kingdom:
And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. (Luke 17:20-21)

The futurists' future kingdom is not Christ's kingdom. Your's is a earthly kingdom that comes with observation. The myth of a future earthly kingdom goes back to the time of Christ. The Jews rejected Christ as their Messiah because they were looking for an earthly Messiah who would grant them the wicked desires of their hearts to rule over their enemies. This wickedness blinded them to the reality of the eternal, spiritual kingdom of Christ.

 

The dispy/futurists don't only make Luke out to be a liar but Christ also. And others.

 

:thumbsup::wavey::thumbs:

 

I'd rather be a futurist than to be one who misses Christ's return in the clouds because I wasn't looking for Him.

 

First I will address your questions and then bow out for reasons stated below.

I pick and choose which scripture to interpret as metaphorical and which to interpret as literal as we all do.
I try to be as consistent as possible and IMO the futurist view is the more consistent.

Isaiah 65-66 Is it literal? Yes.

"Why not quote verse 8? Oh, I know why"

James 5:8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.​

Yes, it's obvious, it weakens my argument which I admit.
Can you admit to the same concerning Acts chapter 1:9-11?

But I repeat "nigh" is a relative term, the question is relative to God or man?
In addition, if futurism is the better view, this scripture is just as valid now as when it was first given and I am indeed patiently waiting for His return.

I am not going to insult or bring innuendo concerning brethren adopting preterism except to say it is IMO flawed interpretation.

So, I am going to try to stay out of this dunnybrook for it is surely what will happen if I remain involved.

If anyone wants to view a debate which covers almost every base RE: preterism vs futurism, you could do a scan on brother asterisktom and myself.
Probably "full preterism" will find the battlefield.

We went at it for quite a time and many many posts, scriptures, early church fathers, etc, as well as many of you.

Yes, you will see that I devolved along with others in the debate into insult and injury (verbal) for which I am truly sorry.

This is about truth and the love of God and His word, not about an opportunity of insult, innuendo and injury to fellow brethren.

We are all seeking the truth (or ought to be).

In the total realm of possibilty, preterism may be correct but I don't think so.
I felt badly for Tom when I saw him being verbally beaten and I repented and told him so.

People ought to do the scans and decide for themselves.
Please do the scans.

Thanks
HankD

 

It is the non dispies that make a liar out of Luke, John, Paul, Isaiah, Zechariah, Daniel, and Christ.

It is OBVIOUS that Satan is NOT bound. Not only because of the obvious temptations and evils that occur, but the plethora of recorded demonic possession occurrences.

It is obvious that Christ is not reigning on earth. Revelation 21-22 make it clear that Jerusalem WHEREVER your warped minds think it will be located, will NOT be occupied by any sinners, and yet Jerusalem is still occupied by Catholics, Muslims, and non believing Jews.

So either Revelation is not true, or it is yet future. If ANY part of Revelation is future, then your accusation against futurism falls flat on it's face. If there is yet ANY PART of the Bible that is yet future, then the accusations against futurism falls apart.

To maintain your position against futurism you would have to prove that there is not one single event, prophecy, or economy left, that everything has been fulfilled...EVERY THING. You can't do that and neither can anyone else.

Furthermore, if there is nothing left for the future, then why witness to anyone? Everyone has already been judged so there shouldn't be any more sinners left. Isaiah also says that ALL SHALL know the Lord from the least to the greatest, and yet there is no agreement among professed believers.

Preterism is a doctrine of devils designed to discourage believers from any future hope (Titus 2:13) and an attempt to steal the zeal from soul winners in bringing people to Christ.

 

There is nothing in Acts 2 that shows that ALL of Joel 2 was fulfilled on the day of Pentacost. When Peter said "but THIS" this what? Were there pillars of smoke and fire? Did the moon turn to blood and the sun become darkened as described in Revelation 8? Did the REMNANT of Israel get saved according to verse 32?

It is obvious that Peter mentioned the part of Joel 2 that WAS fulfilled, and not saying that ALL of it was fulfilled. Christ quoted Scripture the same way (I'll explain below).

Wow! Have you ever read Luke 4:17-21?

17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

Now look at the verse he quoted in Isaiah 61:1,

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;"

NOTICE ANYTHING MISSING IN LUKE!!

Jesus did not quote the ENTIRE prophecy and even separated it IN THE MIDDLE OF THE VERSE, and yet said "this day IS THIS SCRIPTURE FULFILLED", and yet only half of it was fulfilled. HE LEFT OUT THE REST THAT IS YET FUTURE EXACTLY as Peter did in Acts 2.

As stated above, you are calling Luke a liar because Christ did the same thing Peter did.

And "how can the church prophecy if they are not here?" Apparently you don't know the book of Revelation very well.

"And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth....These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will"

First of all, that prophecy was split into different economies which is OBVIOUS because the day of God's vengeance was omitted by Christ ON PURPOSE. Secondly, there are 144,000 Jews sealed to prophesy in Revelation 7:4-8 led by Moses and Elijah in Rev 11:3-7. Those 2 prophecy for 3 1/2 years until they are killed by Satan (Rev 11:4-7) and then when the 3rd woe of Rev 8:13 begins in Revelation 12:11-12, the beast reigns for 3 1/2 years after that totaling 7 years as described in Daniel 9:24-27.

" When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" Acts 1:6

Did Jesus rebuke them and say "the kingdom of God is within you, why are you asking for the time of it's restoration?" NO, He said it is not for them to know the times and seasons of His RETURN. Jesus was answering the PHARISEES in the manner in which they attempted to trick Him, and notice His response was TO THE PHARISEES. So do you believe that the kingdom of God was within the Pharisees? Jesus was making the point that unless the Pharisees believed that He was Christ, it wouldn't matter when the kingdom would come becasue the most important part of the kingdom WAS WITHIN THEM, i.e., STANDING RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM.

[/QUOTE]

The ones who asked about the kingdom in Acts 1 were DISCIPLES. They were not heathen seeking to gain the "wicked desires of their hearts". They were still under Roman rule so they asked a logical question as to when they would no longer be under the oppression of this world, and reign with Christ. You fail to make the distinction between the CHURCH grafted into to be partakers of promises to Israel, and the FUTURE Kingdom ON EARTH when those promises come to complete fruition with the church side-by-side with Israel when they will operate as one body.

So if it's not an earthly kingdom, then why did Jesus respond to the disciples in Acts 1 that the times and seasons are not to be known YET, and that Jesus will return IN THE SAME MANNER they saw Him leave, TO THE EARTH?

Why did He tells the churches of Revelation; "And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father." Rev 2:26-27.

So they are ruling over nations IN HEAVEN? and with a rod of iron IN HEAVEN? So you mean to tell me that God elevates the ungodly nations TO HEAVEN to be ruled over? And if you claim that those nations in heaven are godly, then why would they need to be ruled with a rod of iron?

It's an EARTHLY kingdom, where saints rule over the nations ON EARTH, judging the 12 tribes of Israel ON EARTH (Matt 19:28) where Jesus rules from an EARTHLY throne (Rev 3:19-20) after He sets foot on the Mount of Olives ON EARTH (Zech 14:4) where He will rule from Jerusalem which COMES DOWN FROM HEAVEN TO EARTH (Revelation 3:12).

"Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name." Rev 3:12

There are over 100 different prophecies from Zech, Isaiah, Daniel, 1 and 2 Thess and Revelation that I can prove have not occurred yet.

Preterism is a farce and a doctrine of the devil.

 

I didn't proof-text anything. You simply disagreed with my interpretation and exposition of the Word.

What does Greek Scholar A.T. Robertson say:

Peter is referring back to the phenomena that has just happened. Now the Holy Spirit is revealing to him what is about to come, both now (near future) and in the distant future.

What happened is not what exactly happened in the first century. To state that as dogmatically as you did is to lie. If you believe that so strongly then you must document it, not simply make unfounded statements.
Your statement is as truthful as stating that the moon is populated with purple dinosaurs. It lacks any basis in fact.

Your statement:
"That's exactly what happened in the First Century Church." NOT!!

And so??

Here is the problem with your discombobulated attempt for an explanation. First, God doesn't mess up anything! That is a terrible accusation by you.
Secondly, there were prophets, as there were apostles. They appeared during the same age as the Apostolic Age which ended ca. 98 A.D., or soon there after, when John died--the last of the Apostles. This is 30 years or more after the destruction of Jerusalem. After Titus came into Jerusalem there were still prophets and Apostles. Thomas did not die until 72 A.D. The age of the apostles and prophets did end. It ended at the end of the first century; not at 70 A.D. There is a good reason for that. We don't have apostles today; neither do we have prophets today.

Concerning those that will dream dreams, see visions, and prophesy, yes that will come. It will come after that Great and notable Day of the Lord. Peter was speaking to the Jews, not the Gentile believers in Corinth.

Peter does not say that Pentecost is the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy concerning the last days (Rev.6:12). Peter does not see a celestial cataclysm (vs.19,20). It "is this that Joel speaks of," because it is the beginning of that fulfillment. Peter knew that the last days began with the birth of Christ. Even Herod was afraid when Christ was born.
Again the Spirit was not poured on ALL flesh.
The Kingdom was offered, but rejected.

It is clear you don't understand Luke 17:20-21, plus the verse is taken out of context.
Second, the Jews looked for an earthly kingdom because there is an earthly kingdom promised in the Bible, one of a thousand years in duration. Just because their hearts were wicked does not mean the Word of God is wicked and unreliable. What kind of logic is that??
God's Word and God's promises still remain true.

Christ will come physically. He will come again.
He will set up a physical kingdom on earth for a thousand years as he promised. Tell me, does he have a reason to lie?
He will rule on earth with a rod of iron; with authority.
Today, Satan is the god of this world; not Christ.
There will come a time when Satan will be bound and Christ will rule from this world.
The passages of peace in nature in the harmony of wildlife as described in the book of Isaiah will come true. The curse now on the earth, will be lifted.

 

you poor guy---you must not get any sleep at all looking in the clouds 24 hours a day--how do you keep your eyes open :smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin:

 

One main reason why I haven't posted here in a good while is because of chest-beaters like you, Bro. Greg, and silly assumptions like yours.

When I read some serious questions or comments on the subject I may probably respond.

While you are seriously praying for my recovery from the Devil, maybe you should pray also that you will receive grace to write with humility and kindness toward a fellow brother in Christ.

 

Brother Tom! It's great to see you back! I was getting a little worried and was going to PM you. Hope everything is well; you still in the Orient?

 

Hey, Ky, I am in this exotic place called Kansas. But hopefully we will be going back for another stint in China in about two months. Dalian, this time.

I hope you are doing well.

 

I'm doing good, still in good ol' Kentuck, same ol' same ol', I kinda like it that way.

 

Perhaps that explains your difficulty in understanding prophecy correctly.

 

This is AWESOME!!!!!!

DHK, DrJamesAch, and I agree!!!!!!

Call us futurists, but I consider it optimistic.

This time is being shortened - lest there be none left on earth after the coming great tribulation - tribulation such as the world has never known.

There is nothing new in the great siege camps of armies.

There is nothing new in the slaughter of humankind by sword, disease, pestilence, and famine.

There is nothing new about the annihilation of whole societal groups.

There is nothing new about the narcissistic, the psychopath/sociopath, the depraved...

There is nothing new about the mind altered drug induced states caused by the intoxicants.

There is nothing new with the church caught up in health and wealth thinking that such portray God's approval and blessings.

The world has seen it all before.

What is knew is the great tribulation, the great day of wrath, following the great day when all believers both the living and the dead are caught up together in the air.


Though some scoff and scorn at this coming hope, yet I will rejoice. Christ will return.

There will be a millennium in which Christ rules.

There will be a binding of ALL Satanic forces and even the commander and chief deceiver for that 1000 years, and THEN the final judgment and New Heaven and New Earth.

Lord, hear my voice, as joined with those gathered under your alter that cry out - How much longer before you avenge!

Ah, Even so, Lord Jesus, come, quickly - please!

 

It's interesting to see the preterists and the futurists going at each other, but no comments from the historicist perspective. Even more amusing since both preterism and futurism came from Rome to combat the historicism of the reformers...

Carry on.

 

Actually I hold to a historicist framework with Revelation.

 

I hold to an eccletic historicist-futurist read of Revelation. I didn't think it was appropriate to add that here since I've commented on it numerous times elsewhere.

We have a pretty good mixture of people. With the recent arrivals of several new posters who are rather convinced of their theology, I suspect these conversations with continue to be heated and rigorous. (Not bad things.)

 

It is great that you get one doctrine right out of a hundred.