The Narrow Path Ministries

Forgive me if this is covered elsewhere, but my searches didn't yield any relevant results.

It seems to me that much of the arguing over NT prophecy is between those who believe that it is being fulfilled now or in the near (or undetermined) future, and those who believe that it was largely fulfilled in in the past (70 AD, etc.).

Since many of the Old Testament prophecies had a dual filfillment... a "near" fulfillment and then a future fulfillment in the birth and ministry of Christ, why wouldn't we expect this to be true of NT prophecies? In other words, what if both camps are largely right about the very same prophecies?

Hi,

The NT says that all prophecy was fulfilled in Christ. That leaves little chance that anything was left unfulfilled. Another way to determine whether or not all things have been fulfilled is to look into the fulfilments of the seven feasts of Israel. If only one of them is still not finished then your question may pose a problem for the preterist. I think it can be shown that all the feasts have been fulfilled.

Welcome to the board, BlackUmbrella

Jesus Himself predicted His second coming, as a coming which would be as obvious to all people as the lighting of the sun which shines from the east to the west. He warned against believing those who claim that He comes secretly:

For false messiahs and false prophets will arise and show great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the chosen ones. See, I have told you beforehand. So, if they say to you, ‘See, he is in the desert,’ do not go out; if they say, ‘See, he is in the secret rooms,’ do not believe it. For as the lighting comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of man. Matthew 24:24-27

Luke recorded the angel's prophecy that Jesus would return again in a similar way as He ascended into heaven:

Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, who also said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven." Acts 1:9-11 NKJV

The apostle John wrote that all the tribes (or nations) would mourn because of Him when He returns:

Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen. Revelation 1:7 NKJV

The full preterists say Christ returned in 70 A.D. The Seventh Day Adventists say He returned in 1844. Jehovah's Witnesses say He returned in 1914. But in each case, the world was not aware of a second coming. Not only was it not the case that "every eye" saw Him. The truth is that NO EYE saw Him return ---- for He hasn't yet returned the second time. In none of the cases was there a coming obvious to the world as the lighting of the sun. Rather, in each case it was a supposed secret coming, of which only a few were aware --- the few who interpreted the time frame of the scriptures "accurately". These affirmed "secret" comings are of the very nature against which Christ Himself warned us.

Welcome to the forum, BU,

You wrote:Forgive me if this is covered elsewhere, but my searches didn't yield any relevant results.

It seems to me that much of the arguing over NT prophecy is between those who believe that it is being fulfilled now or in the near (or undetermined) future, and those who believe that it was largely fulfilled in in the past (70 AD, etc.).

The word "preterism" comes from the Latin, praetaritus meaning: "gone before" or "having/has happened." In this sense, all Christians are preterists to come extent in that they all believe some biblical prophecies have happened. E.g., Christ, the messiah, has {already} come, or came, in the First Advent or incarnation.

Steve Gregg covers this in one or more of his free mp3 lectures. If I'm not mistaken, it's in the "Beyond the End Times" on the digitalministries page. Steve doesn't fully cover full-preterist beliefs but makes mention of the basics.

You also wrote:Since many of the Old Testament prophecies had a dual filfillment... a "near" fulfillment and then a future fulfillment in the birth and ministry of Christ, why wouldn't we expect this to be true of NT prophecies?

Dr. Jim Hamilton, a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, sees the birth of Jesus as a typological fulfillment {of Is 7:14} as opposed to a dual fulfillment. I agree with him. This is something of an aside, since we're talking about "end times" eschatology on this thread.

As to the "end times," my view is: The text, depending on what text(s) is/are under consideration, tells or let's us know if there is a fulfillment, and what kind of fulfillment there is.

I don't see "double fulfillment" of the things described in Matthew 24 {or the Olivet Discourse}, or anything in the text(s) that would warrant or require it.

Lastly, you wrote:In other words, what if both camps are largely right about the very same prophecies?

I'm guessing that by "both camps" you mean full-preterists as opposed to partial-preterists, right? It should be mentioned that many dispensationalists are, technically, partial-preterists in that they acknowledge that some of the Olivet Discourse has been fulfilled. Steve elaborates on this in his lectures {perhaps in "When Shall These Things Be?" under Olivet Discourse}.

Re: "largely right."
All camps of eschatology agree to varying degrees. E.g., they all believe Christ said he would come again. But when it comes to the details; they agree to greater and lesser levels. Going from: largely, mostly, some...and on to little, if any, agreement. Two camps that best illustrate this are: full-preterists {who see everything as past} and dispensationalists {who see just about everything as future}.

Partial-preterists aren't necessarily what we would call "in the middle." While they see most of the Olivet Discourse as referring to past {fulfilled} events; they are much closer to dispensationalists with regard to a future Second Coming: In this sense, partial-preterists and dispensationalists, though they have areas of disagreement, are in no agreement with full-preterists.

Btw, I recently began referring to myself as a "quasi-partial-{orthodox}-preterist." My primary reason for doing this is exegetical. I refuse to think from within "camps paradigms." In other words, any systematic theology, no matter how good or correct it may be, has the innate tendency to become THE point of reference — as opposed to being A point of reference: Pointing toward what the Bible authors actually meant (see my signature}, ....

Thanks, and welcome to the forum, BU,

P.S. I think your signature is excellent! and saved it in my "quotable quotes."

RickC wrote: Dr. Jim Hamilton, a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, sees the birth of Jesus as a typological fulfillment {of Is 7:14} as opposed to a dual fulfillment.

Thanks, Rick... I think this could be the key to where my thought is off base. David and other OT figures can in retrospect (often via explicit NT references) be seen as types, which is not a characteristic shared by "end times" prophecies.

Although even as I'm typing I'm thinking, "What if the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD is a type of future events related to Christ's final return?"

I guess I need to get my eschatological beliefs in order before I start speculating. That'll take a while, since I've only recently discovered that dispensationalism may not have all its ducks in a row (I've been a follower of Jesus for 11 years). I actually suspected that just from listening to it, as the "sorta" return of Christ for the rapture and then a "for real" return 7 years later never sounded logical. I get the same vibe from full preterist views, so I guess right off the bat I'm inclined towards a partial preterist view.

Although even as I'm typing I'm thinking, "What if the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD is a type of future events related to Christ's final return?"

BlackUmbrella, Hi

Are you struggling with the thought that another temple will be built and the sacrifical process will start up again and that then Roman armies will come and destroy again the city of Jerusalem and the newly constructed temple? Is this the dual fulfillment you think you might see?

Hi BU {BlackUmbrella}...I hope "BU" is okay by you...I go to a lot of chatrooms....

You wrote:

RickC wrote: Dr. Jim Hamilton, a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, sees the birth of Jesus as a typological fulfillment {of Is 7:14} as opposed to a dual fulfillment.

Thanks, Rick... I think this could be the key to where my thought is off base. David and other OT figures can in retrospect (often via explicit NT references) be seen as types, which is not a characteristic shared by "end times" prophecies.

Although even as I'm typing I'm thinking, "What if the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD is a type of future events related to Christ's final return?"

Admittedly, these things can be complicated....
But I don't see anything in the Olivet Discourse that indicates the 70AD judgment was type of another judgment {to be fulfilled later as its anti-type}.

As Allyn asked and mentioned, and if your background is dispensational as mine and his is; you have possibly been taught "The Roman Empire will be restored" and so on. A long time ago, I investigated this dispensational idea {among the others} and saw that it simply can't be found in the text of Matt 24 and synoptic parallels. So "I got that out of the way" and kept studying.

Of course, the judgments and/or visitations of God to judge do have a similar 'linguistic ring' to them in both testaments. Jesus, the Apostles, and the NT authors either quoted OT passages or alluded to them. In fact, they 'apply' OT passages to what was happening when they were, then, living.

E.g., Matt 24:29 (NASB)
"But immediately after the tribulation of those days [1] THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND [2] THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

[1] Isaiah 13:10; Isaiah 24:23; Ezekiel 32:7; Joel 2:10 {Acts 2:20}; Joel 2:31; Joel 3:15; Amos 5:20; Amos 8:9; Zephaniah 1:15.
[2] Isaiah 34:4; Rev 6:13

and

Acts 2 (NASB)
16but this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel:
17 [3] 'AND IT SHALL BE IN THE LAST DAYS,' God says,
'THAT I WILL POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT ON ALL MANKIND;
AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR DAUGHTERS SHALL PROPHESY,
AND YOUR YOUNG MEN SHALL SEE VISIONS,
AND YOUR OLD MEN SHALL DREAM DREAMS;
18EVEN ON MY BONDSLAVES, BOTH MEN AND WOMEN,
I WILL IN THOSE DAYS POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT
And they shall prophesy.
19'AND I WILL GRANT WONDERS IN THE SKY ABOVE
AND SIGNS ON THE EARTH BELOW,
BLOOD, AND FIRE, AND VAPOR OF SMOKE.
20 [4] 'THE SUN WILL BE TURNED INTO DARKNESS
AND THE MOON INTO BLOOD,
BEFORE THE GREAT AND GLORIOUS DAY OF THE LORD SHALL COME.
21'AND IT SHALL BE THAT EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.'

[3] Joel 2:28-32
[4] {Joel 2:10}; Isaiah 13:10; Ezek 32:7; {Matt 24:29; Mark 13:24; Luke 21:25}; Rev 6:13; 8:12

Compare: Matt 27 (NASB)
45 Now from the sixth hour darkness fell upon all the land until the ninth hour
(see Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44}.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I didn't post these verses to ask you to look them all up. I used BibleGateway(dot)com's very handy NASB references.

I'm pointing at: How Jesus and the Apostles quoted or alluded to the OT.
As we can see, Jesus and Peter both quoted Joel...who also spoke with "judgment language" similarly as other OT prophets.

We could do a separate study on Joel 2:10 to see what Peter and/or the Apostles and Jesus meant in quoting it. This goes back to how complicated things can be in eschatology.....

You also wrote:I guess I need to get my eschatological beliefs in order before I start speculating. That'll take a while, since I've only recently discovered that dispensationalism may not have all its ducks in a row (I've been a follower of Jesus for 11 years). I actually suspected that just from listening to it, as the "sorta" return of Christ for the rapture and then a "for real" return 7 years later never sounded logical. I get the same vibe from full preterist views, so I guess right off the bat I'm inclined towards a partial preterist view.

I'm sure I "know what you mean" about getting your thoughts in order!

Btw, I was a "partial-preterist" years before I really understood what-all the term meant. In other words, I saw that some stuff was fulfilled in the first century.

Today I continue to study these things and don't have everything "ironed out." I speculate and study speculations of others in order to see all viewpoints and all possible correct interpretations. My former system of theology {dispensationalism} continues to be an enemy of "thinking clear" after all these years, which has been approximately 30! {ref. cit., my signature}.

My present view is: Jesus was "really present" in the 70AD judgment. Not physically present but, rather, in His Reigning Presence as the true King over Israel. The King judging the rebellious among His people; like how Yahweh {God} did in OT times. I see the judgments prior to, leading up to, and surrounding 70AD as the same as: "How God judged His people from heaven in the OT"....

So, was Joel 2:10 fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost as Peter certainly seemed to say?
Was Matt 24:29 fulfilled then too?
Or was Matt 24:29 fulfilled twice: 1) Day of Pentecost and, 2) 70AD?
Might we see three fulfillments as in, 3) Matt 27:45 and synoptic parallels {Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44}, above?

Just as OT prophets announced God's judgments at different times, using and repeating the same "judgment language"; so, too, Jesus and the Apostles spoke to their contemporaries in kind. Counting Joel's original prophecy, we have a total of four {so-called} 'fulfillments'. I think we have, in all of these texts, a "recurring judgment theme." Seeking 'fulfillments' in order to arrange our theology is a great idea! But in our attempts to do so, we can miss the point! and get side-tracked. A common theme of judgment which uses similar, if not the same language {quotations or allusions} appears in both testaments.....

It gets complicated.
But what I try to do is think outside the box.

Summing up.
One enemy of exegesis {correct interpretation} is trying to find verses that seem to "link." Texts can be lined-up in ways that can lead us to totally miss what was really being said in the separate verses. Aka, prooftexting. So, however many possible 'fulfillments' of Joel 2:10 there may be is somewhat beside the point and secondary, imo.

What matters is how it was used in each context and in each situation that Joel, Jesus, and/or the Apostles used it. "Lining-up verses" may not yield an answer....

Okay, I need to boil this down!
OT texts, as quoted or alluded to by Jesus, the Apostles, and NT writers had specific meanings in each case they were employed. They were recurring judgment themes with specific, common, language appropriate to each situation. They may, or may not, "fit" into categories that our systems of thought {or systematic theologies} can correctly understand. It's my goal to find out what they meant no matter what obstacles I face. I gladly and willingly reject any kind of thinking I may have, or have been taught, that is the enemy of true theology! Done.

Quick note: I've studied and understand the full-preterist perspective and find its answers unsatisfactory. Also, on this thread: I don't want to contest full-preterist beliefs, nor look at things from that angle {as I've already done it, etc.}.

My studies are leading in other directions....
Thanks,

P.S. Due to anxiety, and maybe a lack of faith, about a job interview I'm having in six hours; I've got insomnia.

I edited my last post significantly in the process.

I'll praise the LORD, however things go, Amen!
Rick--OUT.
Zzzzzzzzzzzz.......

BlackUmbrella wrote:Forgive me if this is covered elsewhere, but my searches didn't yield any relevant results.

It seems to me that much of the arguing over NT prophecy is between those who believe that it is being fulfilled now or in the near (or undetermined) future, and those who believe that it was largely fulfilled in in the past (70 AD, etc.).

Sure. Many people expected end-time events within a generation of the country of Israel forming. And with nothing coming of that expectation many gave up on eschatology but others sought to study it themselves. So there ends up being much discussion between these two concepts.

BlackUmbrella wrote:Since many of the Old Testament prophecies had a dual filfillment... a "near" fulfillment and then a future fulfillment in the birth and ministry of Christ, why wouldn't we expect this to be true of NT prophecies? In other words, what if both camps are largely right about the very same prophecies?

I haven't studied much into different eschatological viewpoints. My exploration first started, many years ago, by reading some Post-Mil books and then I sought to see what scripture said. But my impression of what I've heard (of some people's views) is that the dual fulfillment concept is too loosely applied.

What needs to be done first is to figure out why the purpose of God in the end-time events. Part of this is to determine the audience of the prophecies -- are the prophecies to Jews or to believers? So would there be reason for dual fulfillments?

A book like Daniel lends itself to only single fulfillment. The Book of Isaiah gets strongly into allegory and may have chapters that had sort of a past fulfillment and sort of a future looking fulfillment (a future time beyond the time of nations mentioned in Isaiah).

One error that occurs is that people seem to have taken some judgmental phrases spoken by Jesus in Matt 24 as being a new prophecy using Old Testament judgmental phrases. But Jesus actually showed that these judgments were related and were happening in the near future. Jesus wasn't just borrowing OT wording merely to express a new judgment; He was using the expressions to reflect fulfillment of those OT passages.

BlackUmbrella wrote: In other words, what if both camps are largely right about the very same prophecies?

Hmmm. I have some theory wherein the partial preterist concept may be the true end-time view but that the expectations of the dispensationalist may end up corresponding to the expectations of the partial preterist. But this wouldn't be about a dual fulfillment.

Hopefully this gives clarity to what I'm referring to. Here's an example regarding an Old Testament prophecy:

[Quoted from another website]: King Solomon can also be thought of as a type of Christ. In 2 Samuel 7:13-15 God promised to David that his kingdom would be forever, and that after his loins one would raise up a house to the Lord. This prophesy is thought to have a dual fulfillment. The first fulfillment is found in Solomon (1 Kings 8:18-20). Solomon built a house unto the Lord and sat upon the throne of Israel. Christ also built a house (Matthew 16:17-18). He is also a king. Solomon's house that he built and kingdom which he ruled over were physical. However Christ's house which he built and kingdom which he ruled over was spiritual. Solomon's house to the Lord and his kingdom was a shadow of Christ's spiritual kingdom that was to come.

[Please note that in this next paragraph, I am not asking about the validity of any particular interpretation. It's simply an example that could be applied to any appropriate NT "end times" prophecy]:

So I'm just asking in the most general terms, what if we have a New Testament prophesy that is commonly thought to refer to Nero, for example. Nero would satisfy the terms of the Prophesy as a "first" fulfillment. Does this then render the prophesy "checked off", so that we can say, "That one is fulfilled, it's done. We can leave it for the history books"? OR, is it possible that some future political figure of uncommon wickedness and influence could represent a larger, more comprehensive "second" fulfillment of prophesies related to the antichrist? Thus, those who say the prophesy refers to Nero would be quite correct. But Nero proves to be a "type", or just a "first fulfillment" of a more terrifying, more fully realized global tyrant of the kind thought to be on the horizon by other Christians?