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!

Last days

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Gerad, Aug 16, 2005.

  1. Gerad

    Gerad New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    43
    Ratings:
    +3
    Have we been in the last days for the last 2000 years??? Huh??? Something doesn't seem right about that. I think we can do better in providing some more realistic parameters to "these last days" (written in 68 A.D.) and "the last time". Come on, now, 2000 years just isn't believable. Those expressions denoted NEARNESS, not a vast, airy expanse of time covering however many thousands of years it takes to see Jesus seated on a big chair in Jerusalem. The Lord never said that would happen, by the way. The "throne of his glory" is where he said he would sit, and that's in heaven.

    I say the last days was 30-70 A.D., since "the end" was connected to the end of the Old Covenant, which happened in 70A.D. This view allows us to take all the imminency statements at face-value in their original context, as they should be interpreted.
     
  2. FundamentalDan

    FundamentalDan New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Messages:
    236
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hey, Gerad, it does not matter what you say. What matters is what God says. And here is what He said on this, "Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." II Peter 3:4-8

    And, by the way, the Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool. That has not happened yet, friend. Jesus Christ is coming again in power and great glory, because He said He would. Given a choice between believing a literal interpretation of the Bible and believing you, I choose the Bible.
     
  3. Helen

    Helen <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Ratings:
    +1
    What verses are you referring to, Gerad?
     
  4. James_Newman

    James_Newman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Ratings:
    +0
    Amen FundamentalDan!
     
  5. Gerad

    Gerad New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    43
    Ratings:
    +3
    The enemies of Jesus were the Jews. There is a verse for that too! The Jews were the enemies of Jesus, the Church and the gospel - read I Thes.2:14-16. Read it now.

    The first century "scoffers/mockers" (Peter, Jude) were also the Jews. Notice the terminology in II Peter 3:2-4 - "since the fathers fell asleep". "The fathers" was an expression denoting the Jewish fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In II Pet.2:3, the judgment of the Jewish false teachers would "linger not nor slumber not". No more delay! That matches precisely to I Peter 4:7, where Peter wrote, "The end of all things is at hand NEAR)." Near, not far! 2000 years is NOT near!!!!! Peter heard the Lord tell about the destruction of Jerusalem and how that that fulfilled "all that was written". 70 A.D. was indeed "near" to the dating of Peter's epistles. You can't have imminency in the first century and then say it's still imminent in 20005. Either it was imminent in Peter's time or it wasn't. You can't have it both ways. Either it was true or a lie. It was true, since the Lord's coming was directly linked to "the tribulation of those days", i.e., the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. 70 A.D. fell squarely within the parameters of "this generation".
     
  6. DeafPosttrib

    DeafPosttrib New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,662
    Ratings:
    +0
    Gerad,

    Please show us the evidence of history information from any sites, books, etc. is there any record that a person sees Jesus Christ comes with his angels in the sky in year 70 A.D.?

    In Christ
    Rev. 22:20 -COME QUICKLY!!! Amen! [​IMG]
     
  7. Gerad

    Gerad New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    43
    Ratings:
    +3
    Posttrib, the problem right from the start was a misunderstanding of the nature of the kingdom. The earliest voices post 70 A.D. held to IMMINENCE. Why? Because they were near to the destructuion of Jerusalem in time, and that is what the Lord taught. Very plain. Eventually, the Church fathers had to explain the "non-return" as they got further and further outside the parameters of "this generation". So what eventually came forth was the idea of DELAY. Christ had obviously decided to DELAY his return. Never mind that this contradicted the scriptures, the church fathers had spoken. The church has been teaching delay ever since.

    There were preterist concepts floating around from very early on. But they say the end as being a global conflagration instead of seeing 70 A.d. and it's SPIRITUAL significance. The kibngdom is HEAVENLY, make no mistake about that. Same problem the Jews had.
     
  8. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Ratings:
    +127
Loading...