I know this was directed to HankD but I will answer. The verses are to be taken literally. They are future events, will happen on the day of the Lord, that is why they are not recorded in history. Quite simple really.
Preterism and the Necessity of Honoring the Timing Statements of Christ’s Return
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Logos1, Oct 3, 2011.
Page 3 of 5
-
I have a feeling the only reason you are saying that is b/c it obviously was not fulfilled literally. But the fall of Babylon was an earthshaking moment in the history of the nations. So figurative (apocalyptic) language was used for a normal even in history... imagine that. -
I really don't have a lot of time to play in the sandbox today but a few comments...
-
"Behold, I am stirring up the Medes against them, who have no regard for silver and do not delight in gold."
I'm sure you know, the Medes & Persians ended the Babylonian empire. This was a prophecy of things soon to come. -
e.g. I called my Son out of Egypt.
The Medes (Heb - Madai) were descendants of Japhet.
A culture and people can continue on after their nation and/or empire is defeated. e.g. the Romans became the Italians.
Today we would call the Medes Iranians.
Babylon of Isaiah 13 would be identified with Mystery Babylon of the Revelation.
HankD -
But the one that gets me most is the inconsistencies of verses having dual fulfillments when dispo's in the same breath talk about single meaning and stable meaning.
Isa. 13 very clearly pictures the fall of the Babylonian empire by the Medes. Figural, apocalyptic language was used to describe said fall. And that is a plain reading of the text. -
Iconoclast Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. (Isaiah 13:10)
Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger. (Isaiah 13:13)
When and where did this happen. Documentation is required, not just people's fantasies. -
Very good job!! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: -
-
Look everyone, we each have a methodology to interpret prophecy.
From Isaiah 13 I fully expect that Iran will attack Israel at the foreordained time.
I became weary of the verbal dunnybrook the last time we did this.
Scan the BB if you wish to see all of my answers to preterists. I sense that this is going down a path I don't want to go over again.
HankD -
But verse 13?
Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger. (Isaiah 13:13)
Were the heaven shaken? Was the earth removed out of her place? I don't think so. -
The NT clearly tells us no one has ever seen God
OK I admit I’m a little surprised that you would try to literalize any of these OT verses as a physical appearing of God when one verse, and there are at least two in the N. T, which. blows them all away. I think we can agree that the N.T. should be used to interpret the OT.
You could say these OT verses tell of a spiritual presence, or angel, or use whatever means necessary to rationalize them, but clearly they can’t be used to claim a physical appearing of God where people actually see God in view of the NT writings.
John 1:18
No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.
1 John 4:12
No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us.
So therefore it would have to follow if God has not come to earth in physical form and the father is like the son as John 5:19 tells Then when Jesus comes it won’t be in physical form either.
I think it would be tough to create a bible based case that Christ would return to the earth in a literal, physical form.
You can reference Acts and Rev 1:7, but if those are the best verses to make a case for a physical return I think as many times as it has been shown the correct interpretation of those verses that anyone not enamored by their preconceived notions would quickly dismiss those verses also.
Logos1 -
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)
According to John 1:1 the Word is God. I am not sure I am following you. We don't have to prove the deity of Christ, and that he walked and talked on the earth 2,000 years ago, do we? I assume you believe that--an historical Christ who was deity?
As John says he saw God (full of grace and truth), so did the disciples see him ascend into heaven, and so will every eye see him when he comes again. Also we will see him when he comes for us, for we shall see him, and we shall be like him.
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. (1 John 3:2) -
-
This paragraph starts at verse 6:
Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty. (Isaiah 13:6)
--This is no description of Babylon. It is a description of "The Day of the Lord," which all Jews knew to be well into the future, a day when the judgement of God would come, and then Messiah would come at that time as well. Both events were connected in the Jewish mind. And both events are still connected. Nothing has changed.
The Messiah is still to come.
Judgment is still to come.
That description is still future.
It does not deal with Babylon. -
Seeing a physical Jesus has nothing to do with not seeing God in the OT.
But remember when Jesus was here it was HE who said he would come back Like the Father which clearly established his coming back as not being literal. -
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. (John 14:8-11)
When they saw Christ they saw the Father.
Christ revealed the Father.
The Father was revealed through Christ.
God was manifest in the flesh through Christ. -
There has still been no real attempt to rebut the imperative nature of the time statements as outlined earlier. If the first generation context of the various time statements aren’t honored then there is no basis for honoring any other aspect of Christian tenants either and we are left with nothing.
All the various time statements of the coming of Christ can only point to one conclusion—the bible (inspired words of the Holy Spirit) are telling us HE shall return in the time frame of the first generation of believers.
If you knew nothing of eschatology and just read the bible for the first time that would be your only possible conclusion of Christ's return.
Only preconceived notions blur the obvious truth of the matter. -
Iconoclast Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Because you have not learned how to deal with the language God uses here to describe the fall of Babylon.....does not mean others do not see it....greektim,and Logos have answered this correctly...it also explains the languge of Mt 24...which you also mangle.
To see it clearly look at how God uses the same or similar language elsewhere.....
Page 3 of 5