The rapture

With all due respect, Sir, you haven't shown us one quark of historical fulfillment of any eschatological prophecy.

Those events will be LITERAL. We see that Jesus' prophecy of the destruction of the destruction of J & the temple was LITERALLY fulfilled, as part of the fulfillment of His "days of vengeance" prophecy against that generation of Jews.

Right now, the first 13 verses of the Olivet Discourse have been fulfilled, with the preaching of the Gospel to all peoples still being fulfilled. But the main show hasn't started yet-the coming of the beast & false prophet, marka the beast, etc. & certainly not the returna Jesus.

Please show us the occurrence of the events in history that prets say have already occurred. Let's see REAL PROOF, not guesswork or imagination.

 

My objection to the word "age" has to do with the Dispensationalist myth that history is divided into 7 dispensations (or ages). According to this doctrine, we are currently living in the 6th Dispensation (aka "Age of Grace" or "Church Age"). I rejected that eschatological view many years ago. To be completely honest with you, I'm not quite sure I entirely understand where you are even coming from sometimes. For instance, what are you talking about regarding the church being individuals vs fellowship creating doctrinal & denominational differences?

I'm not sure how you can say that Jesus does not resurrect the dead and separate the sheep from the goats, when Matthew 25:31-46 makes it so clear that He does. From your "harvest" comment, I am guessing you were referring to Matthew 13:39, where Jesus said that the harvest is the end of the age. Again, I don't see your point.

 

The proof is can be found in our history books. You claim that only the fist 13 verses of Matthew 24 have been fulfilled. Prove it. Jesus never said, "okay guys, I am switching to tell you about events 2,000 years in the future". As I mentioned earlier, let's compare Matthew 24 with Luke 21. In Luke's account, those in Judea must flee to the mountains when they see Jerusalem surrounded by armies. This is the exact same event that we see in Matthew's gospel. That is proof from Scripture that is backed up by proof from history. On the other hand, all you offer as "proof" are a few passages followed by what you think they mean.

The Great Tribulation was the siege of Jerusalem (AD 67-70). The "nor ever will be again" language is hyperbolic, similar to Ezekiel 5:8-9.

Since you left off with verse 13, let's discuss Matthew 24:14 - "This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the whole world". The word for "world" in this text is "oikumene", which refers to the inhabited earth, specifically the Roman Empire. It's the same word we find in Luke 2:1, where Augustus issued a decree that a census be taken of the inhabited earth. Obviously, Augustus was only taking a census of the Roman Empire. If you read Romans 1:8, Romans 16:25-26, Colossians 1:3-6, 21-23, and 1 Timothy 3:16, you will see that the gospel has indeed been preached throughout the whole world - in the original sense of how Jesus meant it.

I could show you more evidence, but you will dismiss everything as Preterist nonsense. However, I would caution you against changing the meaning of the very words that Christ Himself has spoken.

 

The point is simple-At the rapture, Jesus will resurrect the souls of the righteous dead first, then call the living saints to meet Him in the air, along with the resurrected dead ones.

 

Thank you for clearing that up. As y'all know, I believe the rapture and the whole Dispensationalist view of eschatology is just a bunch of man-made doctrine. Of course, that's been the whole point of our disagreements all along.

 

EASY! J & the temple were destroyed, chronicled by both Jewish & Roman writers. (A victory arch dedicated to Titus still stands in Rome to this day.) The remains of the temple are scattered on the ground, with its steps & porch floor still there. And a little digging reveals the ruins of Jerusalem, which were soon built over.

Different event. Jesus said to flee at once when the armies came, but there was some 8 months between sieges, plentya time to flee. But the coming event, with mechanized, mobile armies involved, will leave very little time to flee.

No, it wasn't. The trib shall come upon THE WHOLE WORLD, as Jesus said. No hype about it. And there have been far-worse events than that siege.

Augie wasn't Jesus, & he wasn't making a prophecy. When Jesus said "the whole world", that's what He meant.

Hmmmm...care to show us when the Gospel was preached in North America or Australia in the 1st century ????????

Well, so far, most of it IS pret nonsense!

And you prets are the ones trying to change Jesus' words, calling them "hyperbole, apocalyptic language, etc.

You're gonna hafta do a LOT-BETTER with historical proof than what you've done so far. I'm a fairly-keen student of history, & I've not seen any of those events in history save what I've mentioned earlier. And once again, that pret practice of reducing Jesus' prophecies to "figurative/symbolic" status is a shot-put that won't float. it's simply FALSE, as is preterism itself.

 

Right. And I posted the Scriptures that clearly point out that the rapture WILL occur. I hope you change your attitude so you may be included in it if you're still alive. (I'm age 72; I likely won't be.)

 

You have only posted your interpretation of your "rapture" verses. They are only "clear" if you already buy into that view. Actually, I wish this was a true doctrine instead of a made up fantasy. I'd love to escape. One wouldn't have to believe in the rapture in order to be taken. He would just be very surprised. BTW, I will answer your longer response tomorrow.

 

OK, but there's no other way to "take" those Scriptures without adding to or changing their meanings.

 

Meanwhile, once again, Once again, these Scriptural reminders:

1 Cor. 15:51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.

And in 1 Thess.4: 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.

Rev. 3:10 Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

Those Scriptures are as plain as the nose on your face. There's no other valid meanings nor interps of them. Plainly they prophesy the event we call the rapture.

 

Of course that proves THAT Matthew 24:1-13 has been fulfilled. It doesn't disprove that the rest of the Olivet Discourse has also been fulfilled. You have no proof that verses 14-41 have not been fulfilled.

You can't say these are separate events when Jesus makes it so clear they were the same. The escaping Jewish Christians had no idea how long the Roman army would be gone, so they split right away. It is odd that nobody really seems to know why the Romans left. It could only be that God, in His infinite grace, provided the means of escape for His children. The idea that this is about a modern event is pure fantasy. In Luke 21:20-24, Jesus tells His disciples "when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies...flee to the mountains". This language is nearly identical to what we see in Matthew 24:15-20. The only difference is that Matthew places the warning a few verses later. The only way you can believe these are two separate events is to presume they are in order to fit your view.

You are a pretty good historian, to be sure. However, you are not very good with the ancient Greek language. The Greek word "oikumene" means "the inhabited earth", which refers to the Roman Empire. On the other hand, the Greek word "kosmos" refers to the entire world. "Oikumene" (the Roman Empire) is the same word used in each of these cases. Augustus was taking a census of the Roman Empire. Jesus did not change the word from "oikumene" to "kosmos". Same thing with the gospel spreading throughout the entire world - this was not "kosmos", but the Roman Empire.

We Preterists do not reduce anything Jesus said to mere symbolism. Jesus clearly used symbolic and figurative language other times - "I am the Door", "I am the True Vine", "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up", etc. I have shown that OT prophecies often use symbolism. Yet, you act as though it is beneath Jesus to use symbolic language; that you must apply a wooden literal view to what He said. Why? If you would drop your anti-preterist bias, you might actually learn something new.

 

I'm not the one who is changing what the words mean.

 

Not sure why you just repeated the Scriptures. I've explained the true interpretation, but you refuse to believe it. If there is a point to keeping up our discussion, that's fine. Neither of us are going to budge, and I've better things to do with my time than engage in a discussion where we just repeat the same points and neither of us is going to convince the other to change their views.

 

I have PLENTY of proof. It's called the encyclopediae before me, other history boox I have or have read, and a whole internet-full of history, & the occurrence of those events is not found in any of them.

Not according to some of their own writings. They left within days, but most of them collected what items they could pack.

Then, call me "nobody". While Vespasian was there, Nero killed himself as Otho had rebelled &led an army against him; Otho became very unpopular & killed himself; Vitellius succeeded him, but began a spell of murders. The army recognized vespasian as Caesar, & he left Jerusalem with his army to get rid of Vitellius, which he did, & became Caesar himself. That took about 8 months, & when V was settled in, he sent his son Titus, an able & popular general, to suppress the Jewish revolt, which was mainly being waged by the Zealots.

Again, Jesus had warned them to flee AT ONCE when the armies appeared. He didn't say to flee when they DISappeared, which is what they did.

Better study s'more. Oikumene means just what you first said-the inhabited earth. It's not at all limited to the Roman empire except in some pret imaginations & wishful thinkers.

"Kosmos" means the universe. You're still swinging & missing.

Knowing His time was short, Jesus answered His disciples literally.

Now, if the trib had occurred in 66-70 AD, it woulda made Jesus a liar twice. First, the siege of J was NOT the worst event in man's history by a long shot, & not even the worst thing to have happened to the Jews. The nazi holocaust was far-worse, killing a lot more Jews than the siege of J did. And Jesus said He[d return IMMEDIATELY AFTER the trib. So, if the trib was then, he's long-overdue !

In trying to justify the pret myth, you're still trying to teach a pig to roller-skate. I suggest you look at the EVIDENCE against it.

And, BTW, the only prets I have anything against are those authors who spread the pret garbage, such as Gentry & Preston. IMO, they're simply fulla baloney.

"Preterism-Phony as a $3 bill!"

 

OH??????????????
You're saying that "oikumene" means the Roman empire alone.

 

Then you simply don't believe those Scriptures? The ONLY valid interp is just what they say.

 

So Augustus had the entire inhabited earth counted in his census.

 

That is circular reasoning. It's not a question of believing the Scriptures. It's understanding the author's intended meaning. Not all Scriptures can be read the same way - history, poetry, and prophecy are each understood differently.

 

Your proof is just so much confirmation bias.

Thank you for the history regarding why the Roman army left. That really makes sense. When you say you are good at history, you ain't kidding.

I gave you the definitions of oikumene and kosmos, along with their usage in the Bible. I stand by my previous argument.

I share your view of Don Preston, and all Full Preterism promoters. However, I have the greatest respect for Ken Gentry, Gary DeMar, R.C. Sproul, and other Partial Preterism teachers and authors. I believe we've already discussed the rest of the points you made.

 

Not at all. Like so many words, oikumene has more than just one possible meaning. This was used to mean the Roman Empire throughout the NT.