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!

Looking for info: Partial Preterism

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Gorship, Mar 16, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Lodic

    Lodic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    377
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I've seen Tommy Ice's arguments destroyed by Gary DeMar. I'm sure that Hanegraaf will have a great defense for the early dating of Revelation, just as Gentry does. I can't recommend his "Before Jerusalem Fell" highly enough. To be fair and balanced, I will take a look at the videos you have posted. However, I can't promise to watch them all the way through, as they are about an hour each. Well, time to get back to work. Time flies when you are having fun.
     
  2. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    I just feel bad for people caught up in this movement. It's truly intellectual suicide. Kind of like the ordeal with Jesus' use the the word kosmos. When you thought he didn't use the word it was everything. When you found out he did, it meant nothing. It's disingenuous. Hank argues very much the same way.
     
  3. Lodic

    Lodic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    377
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The way I see it, hanging on the "Futurist" view is the intellectually suicidal view. Too many holes, too many things you have to read into Scripture, making up gaps in time, etc. However, I will take the comparison to Hanegraaf as a high compliment, even though he is far more intelligent than I.

    Since you brought it up, you never did address the real issue I was talking about the other day. I don't deny that Matthew used "kosmos", but you seem to deny that Luke used "oikumene" in the exact same event. What do you find disingenuous in my argument?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    As soon as you address your argument about kosmos. You've been dishonest ever since, destroying your own credibility. Until you come clean i cannot take you seriously on this subject. Kosmos used to matter to you until you discovered Jesus used the word. That is intellectual dishonesty.
     
  5. asterisktom

    asterisktom Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,201
    Likes Received:
    607
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I used to automatically believe the late 90s date for Revelation I first came across the alternative view of the 60s date when I was going through Schaff's History of the Christian Church. He had changed his view in between publication of editions of his History. That took guts!

    It got me to investigate more thoroughly and convinced me of that earlier date.

    All of this was before I became preterist.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    Intellectual suicide definitely takes guts, though there are some other names for it.
     
  7. Lodic

    Lodic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    377
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I addressed that right away, when I confessed that I was thinking of Matthew's version of the OD instead of Luke's. I've been up front the entire time. On the other hand, you have never addressed the oikumene question, except to claim this is from a different setting. It's well known that Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 are parallel accounts of the Olivet Discourse, so that argument doesn't hold.
     
  8. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    I know. But you didn't. You deflected and pretended that the use of kosmos was never a big deal. Disingenuous.
     
  9. Lodic

    Lodic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    377
    Faith:
    Baptist
    That's not true, Brother. I acknowledged that Matthew used kosmos, but you totally disregarded Luke's use of oikumene. Then you decided to focus on my quotation mistake instead of addressing this question.
     
    #189 Lodic, Mar 20, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2019
  10. asterisktom

    asterisktom Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,201
    Likes Received:
    607
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I see you have run out of cogent, intelligent responses. It takes chutzpah (not guts) to dismiss a scholar like Trench as you did.

    I suppose my putting you on ignore will also be intellectual suicide.
     
  11. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    No, it was a fair response. You stated categorically that it took guts to hold a certain unpopular view. You didn't make an argument, just stated your opinion. I'm merely gave mine, that it could also indicate some other things. Yeah, a little sarcasm to bring it home, but nothing wrong with that.
     
  12. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    Yes, but then abandoned your argument that kosmos actually proved something and continue to pretend you never believed it did. Your answer was scripture hopping. You're still doing it. I cannot take you seriously after that.
     
  13. Lodic

    Lodic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    377
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Let's take a Mulligan on this. So, to start again, in Matthew's account of the Olivet Discourse, the word for "world" is "kosmos", which indicates that the events that Jesus is speaking of will be worldwide. However, in Luke's account, the word for "world" is "oikumene", which indicates a localized event. In other places where oikumene is used, it indicates the Roman Empire. How would you reconcile this seeming contradiction?
     
  14. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    This is truly how Preterists argue and think. This is why it's so difficult to take them serious.

    Your argument now is that Scripture contradicts. That is pathetic. It's also not true. Words get their meaning from context and Matt. 24 is context to every other word he spoke.

    If Jesus said clearly in Matt. 24 this would be a worldwide event, then it will. Period. The question is, do you have the faith to believe him?
     
  15. Lodic

    Lodic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2018
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    377
    Faith:
    Baptist
    So your answer is to totally ignore Luke? Not even a discussion about it? And you expect us to take YOU seriously?
     
  16. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    And that's just in Great Britain.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Six Hour Warning
    This thread will be closed sometime after 6:30 PM Pacific.
     
  18. Calminian

    Calminian Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    798
    Even this response assumes Luke contradicts Matthew. I'm merely pointing out the ridiculous conclusion you've made that Scripture contradicts. If this is where you're forced to go, you're now arguing for inerrancy.
     
  19. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    10,719
    Likes Received:
    781
    Faith:
    Baptist
    There are two different words used, one word in Matthew and another in Luke. Luke clarifies the meaning for those outside Judaism. It is not a contradiction and I haven't seen any evidence that Lodic claims such a thing. You are simply throwing out accusations instead of dealing with scripture.
     
    #199 Baptist Believer, Mar 20, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  20. blacksheep

    blacksheep Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2019
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    13
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The indignation of the LORD has never been upon ALL nations or upon all armies. The only armies that could be implied here is the Assyrians or the Edomites. NOT ALL ARMIES. However, verse 2 implies the LORD makes war against these armies and destroys them! He never destroyed ALL armies!

    For the indignation of the LORD is upon all nations, and his fury upon all their armies: he hath utterly destroyed them, he hath delivered them to the slaughter.

    This passage, like many others in Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, has BOTH appears to have, (and may have) historical allusions, but when things are indicated to have NEVER happened, it has a future fulfillment.
    Verse 8 says, " For it is the day of the LORD'S vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion.

    So there will be a day of his vengeance coming. It is the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion.

    The translation your using doesn't use the word STARS in verse 4. It uses the word HOST. So does the Textus Receptus….

    ְצָבא tzba host-of
    ַהָשַּׁמִים e·shmim the·heavens

    The word STAR isn't used in the text. There are two words for STAR in Hebrew. They are 3598 Kiymah kee-maw' and 4264 machaneh makh-an-eh'. The word HOST (NOT STAR) in Isaiah 34:4 is the word tsaba', so right off the bat you're barking up the wrong tree.

    Isaiah 34:4 is also repeated by John in Revelation 6:14...

    "And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places."
    Here too in 2 Peter...

    But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

    Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

    The "scroll" may imply that there's so much debris emitted into the atmosphere that it appears like a scroll.

    Isaiah has a HOST of chapters that I believe futurist typically interpret as fulfilled whereas I believe are NOT.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...