An Examination of Revelation 1:7: Futurism vs. Preterism

I know you are a partial Preterist. I was too once. I was a strong dispy premil most of my life then in quick order became amil, partial Preterist, then full Preterist. Only full Preterist really made the bible all fit together for me without logical gaps and contradictions.

I agree he came in judgment against Jerusalem.

Christ told us his kingdom would not be a visible kingdom.

Luke 17:20-21

0Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed, 21nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or 'There!' for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you."

 

Apology accepted.

A big part of your problem is you make the mistake of not letting time move forward after an event is spoken of in the bible. Time stands still for you.

Christ obviously knows more about his return after returns to heaven than he did while earth bound based on the events he lays out to John in Revelation.

His return was in the future to the Apostles at the time of writing the NT, but it is in the past to us.

In Matthew 24 he links the end of the age with the destruction of the temple. Obviously he is speaking of the end of the Old Covenant age not the end of time.

 

Consider this

In terms of it will not be a visible return. Not only do we have Luke 17:20-21 we also have the Words of Christ and the apostles about his coming being a presence not a physical, literal coming. For example:

In Matthew 24: 3, 23,27,39 the word for coming is Parousia which really means the presence of the Lord—not a physical body coming.

Tie this into the old testament comings of God like in Isaiah 19:1 when God rode a swift cloud against Egypt. No one saw God riding any clouds but understood his hand, his will, his presence was found in the Assyrian army defeating Egypt.

The only way the apostles could understand this type of coming was if it was the same type of coming they were already familiar with in the scriptures unless they were told differently. Christ didn’t redefine his coming or tell us it should be interpreted differently. So there is no reason for us to interpret it differently—yet we turn it into literal English because we don’t know how to apply the language to what was the scriptures for them or our Old Testament.

Further strong evidence is 1 Thessalonians 4:15; 5:23 and other places in the epistle which again uses the term Parousia.

Notice here when the Thessalonians think they have missed the return of Christ and Paul corrected them and told them he had not returned yet the way in which he corrects them.

He didn’t say you won’t be able to miss the Lord’s return because every physical eye will see him appear in the sky or the earth will be burned up and destroyed—don’t worry you can’t miss it—he only corrects them on the timing not the nature of his return. They had the nature of his return correct—it was possible to miss that—it wasn’t an event placed at the end of time.

Also note verses in the new testament such as Christ will return with all his saints as in 1 Thess 3:13 this is just a twist on the same pattern in the old testament for such verses as Deut 33:2, Zech 14:5 etc which again is a Jewish expression for the presence of God—no one ever saw God up in the sky with angels, holy ones, etc.

There are so many verses that fall into harmony only when viewed this way.

 

That was easy--yet again!

Say what?

DHK

I think you better let me decide what I base my beliefs on. I do such a better job at that than you do when you twist my words for me. This post is right out of left field, but no matter brother.

First the author of John is more likely John Mark than it is St. John (Revelation reads much more like 2 Peter than it does St. John’s epistles). Further John Mark was most likely on a mission trip to Patmos and not exiled there.

There is no physical, literal, nor actual evidence on Patmos that John was ever there simply old wives tales that get repeated and believed and sainted into the gospel by men—sorry to have to burst your bubble—but, facts is facts.

You should cut back on your posting long enough to read up on the book of Revelation. Chap 2:9 and 3:9 refer to the Jewish persecution of the church—that my friend is internal evidence of the early dating of Revelation which puts to shame all the references to Irenaeus who advocated including Gnostic writings in the inclusion of the New Testament and was known as not the brightest light bulb in the early church too boot.

You make this easy for me DHK.

 

Dating?

How did this discussion get veered into dating anything?

is is this another one of your tactics to skirt the issue when you run out of scriptural ammo to make your case Rev?

As far as dates go none of the books of the New Testament mention Christ’s prophecy about the destruction of the temple coming true and most scholars who approach this honestly agree there is no way the NT writers would have left that fact out if it had already happened. All of these trumped reasons you can concoct pale in comparison.

You can make the writing of Revelation last week if you want—you just can’t make a real convincing argument for it.

You still haven’t been able to explain, twist, or torture away the words of Christ that he was coming back soon and given the 2,000 years of failure of your position you surely realize in everyone’s eyes you will look foolish at some point. It will take longer in the eyes of some than others, but eventually 99% of the population will in their own time and own way reach the conclusion that you have misinterpreted the return of Christ and he actually came back in 70 AD. Just the way it is my friend.

 

And now the most famous dater of the BB back by popular demand

Any times dates are being bantered around Mel shows up like a certain mythological creature coming out on a full moon. I love it!

Why Mel that’s almost enough to make me wonder who’s side you are on in these little debates—we full preterists have to stick together against those futurist heathen!

“Your understanding of the inspiration of Scripture is utterly astounding!” Mel

Why thank you Mel!

P.S. Hmm, do you have any new dates for us today Mel!

 

I think the testimony of Christ’s soon return by Himself and the apostles will trump the Church fathers of 300 AD any day of the week.

The early church fathers were not inspired writers.

If you want to know what the abomination of desolation is then look at Luke 21:20

"And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh."

Christ himself tells us what the abomination of desolation is so we don’t have to speculate on it. You can argue whether his was referring to the Roman army or zealot armies leading up to the battle with Rome—but either way it is an army.

Obviously when Christ says this generation shall not pass till these things be fulfilled he is referring to his generation---he would have specified so if he meant another generation.

How could anyone miss that? Only by trying to turn it into something it isn’t.

Those two in the field compared to Noah that you try to turn into a rapture verse—that comparison is totally reversed.

In Noah day it was the one who got swept away by the flood that God’s judgment came down on—Noah and his family were the ones left behind.

This comparison exposes the rapture for the “fool’s errand” that it really is. It’s so laughable. I just wish Mel would give is another date for it.

The sword proceeding out of Christ’s mouth—I know I know you think there is a literal sword like his tongue that is coming out of his mouth like that painting we see all the time.

This is referring to the presence of Christ—it is the exact same thing referred to as the Logos in John chapter 1 and Genesis 1 when it says the spirit of God hovered over the deep.

It is the same as the Word of God goes out and accomplishes his purposes and not return to me empty in Isaiah 55:11

These are all different ways of expressing the presence of God, of Christ, of the Lord.

Thinking a sword will protrude out of his mouth—no wonder people then think they can turn the soon coming of Christ into something 2,000 years into the future and think it is still imminent.

Well people are still being saved today and fortunately they will keep right on being saved for billions of years into the future.

Fewer and fewer people are for his imminent return since Preterism is gaining ground every where—but this post is long enough I’ll create a second to deal with that.

 

Looking into the future

Preterism looks stronger every day that passes and futurism looks weaker and that trend will always continue—time is own our side.

Preterism has its own magazine, many authors who write on the topic and help explain it, it’s own radio, and more and more web sites, blogs, etc with each passing day.

Even the mainstream futurist’s study bibles are addressing it. Sure they disagree with it, but they can no longer ignore it and just pretend it will go away. Check out the ESV study bible for instance.

A few years ago no study bibles ever mentioned Preterism and now they feel compelled to.

At the same time more and more people are finding out that John Darby created the notion of a rapture and they are casting away that fairy tale as quickly as possible.

These are encouraging trends and I have no doubt they will continue.

 

We know Christ doesn't lie therefore we know if we are honest that we have to look for a type of return which is not thousands of years into the future. (Well actually I did see one poster one time say he thinks those people are still alive out there some where living in disguise).

I don't know how anyone can be honest and try to get weasel their way around this verse.

This verse makes a mockery of the whole notion of futurism.

It's like a death blow to dispensationalism.

I know because I use to be a premil dispy--I can say it having been a member of the family most of my life.

When I realized the apostle where preterists I knew I had to change my theology to match theirs and not try to twist and torture theirs to match mine.

You would think people would be relieved they don't have to worry about the antichrist taking control of the world, the tribulation, etc but they seem to miss the excitement of it all. I guess it makes life less exciting for some--they miss the adrenalin rush it gives them.

They are addicted to it.

I enjoy a good dispy teacher as much as anybody. Even though I don't believe any of it now--it is still very entertaining stuff.

I'm glad I got to live before dispensationalism dies out and gets assigned to the dust bin of history. It has been a fun ride.

 

I still haven't seen anyone make a legitimate case for Rev 1:7 being a literal, physical coming of Christ.

Or that every eye shall see him not mean perceive with the mind as opposed to see with the eyeball.

Or that those who pierced him not mean those of his generation.

I started posting to test what I believe in to give others a chance to point out the holes in it and make a better case for another way of thinking--but I don't really get much of that.

What I have gotten is the opportunity to learn all the means and methods that can be used to weasel around verses that futurists don't like. I get to see them take their best pot shots at verses that give them trouble.

In that sense it has been a learning experience just a different type of learning experience than what I was expecting.

 

I would say that those already dead and residing in Sheol or where ever such souls reside had to be risen from there and judged appropriately at the second coming.

For those individuals who lived since then at time of their death they are judged.

This allows for saints to go immediately into the presence of God when they die.

Interesting that all those premil dispy preachers who tell families of those who have died that the departed one has gone on to be with the Lord that they are actually taking a preterist position on such matters.

If they think the judgment is in the future then the souls of those who have died have to wait till the judgement they are waiting for to settle the issue of their eternal fate so can't go immediately into heaven to be in the presence of the Lord.

Did you get that Revmwc looks seems like 99% of preachers today are already of the preterist persuasion when it comes time to do a funeral. I bet even you are--welcome aboard!

 

I was a partial preterist for a short time too--you may well complete your journey to full preterism before you know it. I doubt many who are partial think they will become full preterist at the time.

It was when I realized that the apostles were full preterists that I made my conversion to full preterism.