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!

Featured A Curious Omission

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by asterisktom, Jun 2, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. George Antonios

    George Antonios Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2019
    Messages:
    2,895
    Likes Received:
    298
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Many Amils claim that 70 A.D. was the 2nd coming of Christ.
     
  2. Lodic

    Lodic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    377
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Many Preterists (including myself) believe that while Christ "came" in judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70, the actual 2nd Coming is still in our future.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    1,458
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Preterist...which is a small minority of amillenialist believers.
    Amillenialist's simply don't manufacture a non-biblical "pre-trib" rapture not ever discussed in the Bible.
     
  4. George Antonios

    George Antonios Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2019
    Messages:
    2,895
    Likes Received:
    298
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Let's stay on topic.
     
  5. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    16,089
    Likes Received:
    1,243
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Does not answer my question. Orthodox Preterists do not hold that view.
     
  6. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Not the ones that I have read and talked with!
    They see Second Coming still a future event!
     
  7. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    1,458
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You brought it up and showed you don't know amillenialism and who holds it.
     
  8. George Antonios

    George Antonios Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2019
    Messages:
    2,895
    Likes Received:
    298
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Ok @AustinC
     
  9. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,612
    Likes Received:
    2,896
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm glad the HS has your permission to do so....
     
  10. George Antonios

    George Antonios Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2019
    Messages:
    2,895
    Likes Received:
    298
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This is reflective of knee-jerk contentiousness. That comment was really tone-deaf.

    The comment was in response to the OP's statement:

    I answered that the scriptures can indeed silently pass over monumental events and illustrated it by pointing out that Daniel never mentions the return of the captive Jews.

    Therefore, by "can" I did not mean "permission", but rather, evidently to those who do not make a man an offender for a word (Isa.29:21), meant that the scripture can ignore anything they want, should the word of God so choose.

    And I can't believe I had to explain that.
     
    #70 George Antonios, Jun 7, 2021
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2021
  11. asterisktom

    asterisktom Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,202
    Likes Received:
    607
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Not the same thing. I am writing about the silence of all the writings of John. And you are making the very tail end of the life of Daniel (one to three years maybe) as your counter-point. Years after the angel told him "Go your way, Daniel". The two are not comparable.

    I am not interested in arguing about this, George. I made my point. I don't think it needs repeating.
     
    #71 asterisktom, Jun 7, 2021
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
  12. George Antonios

    George Antonios Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2019
    Messages:
    2,895
    Likes Received:
    298
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I wasn't even talking to you! I was replying to @kyredneck! Hold your sting-reflexes, will you guys?
     
  13. asterisktom

    asterisktom Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,202
    Likes Received:
    607
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You said "The comment was in response to the OP's statement:"

    I wrote the OP.
    You quoted me.

    And then you fault me for responding?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. George Antonios

    George Antonios Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2019
    Messages:
    2,895
    Likes Received:
    298
    Faith:
    Baptist
    ...wow (and I see you edited your initial reply). The conversation was between me and @kyredneck.
    The tenor of your initial reply was out of any sense of that consideration.
    Nor had you and I argued about anything...
    Again, I can't believe I have to explain such things.
    Then again, this is the kind of mentality boards attract.
     
  15. asterisktom

    asterisktom Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,202
    Likes Received:
    607
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Is editing a reply some kind of character flaw?

    Basic forum etiquette:
    Person A quotes person B (In this case, persons B and C)
    Persons B and C have a perfect right to respond.

    I can't believe I have to explain such things.

    Feel free to respond or not. I only have one other person on ignore. In a minute it will be two.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    But by the time the book had been written and a few copies made, it would already have been out of date.! I agree that we are not supposed to be setting dates for the "Antichrist" to appear. Many of them had already come when John wrote his first letter. The purpose of the book is for the understanding and encouragement of people all through the ages.
    The problem you have is that Nero is actually only the fifth 'king.' Julius Caesar, as you will know if you know your Shakespeare, turned down the crown three times when it was offered to him.

    'You all did see that on the Lupercal,
    I thrice did offer him a kingly crown
    Which he did thrice refuse. Was this ambition?'


    It was Augustus who claimed him as the first Emperor to consolidate his own legitimacy as Caesar's heir and Preterists claim him because without him their system doesn't work. But I do assure you that he never, ever claimed to be king or Emperor..
    But yes, I know that the early date is crucial to Preterism, which is one reason that I think it's a bad system to adopt. But so long as you believe in a physical future return of Christ, I'm not going to fall out with you. Therefore I shall stop my participation on this thread here.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  17. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    1,458
    Faith:
    Baptist
    @asterisktom, since when did silence become a sound argument?
    Yet, if you wish to go there, we have no text, anywhere, that says Jesus returned and raptured the elect at 70CE, only to have the elect continue to evangelize and suffer persecution from 70CE to the present hour.
    In this matter, silence would eliminate preterism as a valid theory entirely. Do you still wish to argue from silence?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  18. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This one doesn't.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    1,458
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes, your behavior is what you condemn in others.
    You tried to state that most amillenialist's are preterists, which is false. Historically, the church has been amillenial and not preterist.
     
  20. asterisktom

    asterisktom Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,202
    Likes Received:
    607
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Austin, first of all, I appreciate the pun in the first sentence, intended or not.:Biggrin

    Arguing from silence is actually legitimate, but it is not something I would rely on totally. Also important is the internal evidence that Revelation was written while the Temple was still standing. But the other pieces of evidence are the numerous time statements (which I will gladly go into) combined with the Scripture teaching that when the Parousia happens (happened) the canon is closed. So, yes, we do have texts - in many places. All these evidences combine together to make a good case for both a pre-AD 70 date for all Scripture as well as for Full Preterism in general.

    What I think you are overlooking is audience relevance. Much of the New Testament was not written primarily to us. There came the rapture and the resurrection from the dead, just as it is written in Thessalonians. Then there was a brief time when there were no Christians on the Earth. Then the next Christians started, grew in numbers, faced persecutions (this time mostly from various Roman administrations) and on and on up to our time.

    Nowhere is there a promise that Christians on Earth would be free from hardships. And though Christ rules from that time on, it is a "rule in the midst of enemies".
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...