Why disagree with the church fathers on eschatology

[Homer]

So when Jesus gave the great commission, Matt. 28, he was referring to the then known world, or Roman empire? Surely Jesus would know there was more to the world than that, seeing as how He was in on the creation. And I would think He would have used "all nations" consistently.

[steve]

Can we believe that Eusebius was referring to AD 70 as the time of the downfall of all kingdoms, and the establishment of the godly kingdom? I suspect (though I don't know) that he was alluding to the fall of paganism, as a result of the conversion of Constantine, and the subsequent Christianization of the Empire. It seems inconceivable that the 200 years of persecution of the Church preceding Constantine's conversion would have been described by Eusebius as the season following the fall of all pagan kingdoms. If the kingdoms had fallen, why were the emperors still wasting the saints? Come to think of it, if the kingdoms have fallen, why do many kingdoms still waste the Church? To describe these centuries of persecution as having taken place following the fall of the kingdoms would seem bizarre.

[robbyyoung]

Can we believe that Eusebius was referring to AD 70 as the time of the downfall of all kingdoms, and the establishment of the godly kingdom?

Steve, the point is Eusebius obviously had “Preterist” thoughts and conclusions. But like you said, “It is always encouraging to find others (e.g., church fathers or respected scholars) who reach the same conclusions as I have reached, but their agreement is of secondary importance.”

Furthermore, all these so-called church Fathers or anybody else for that matter, if they would have lived during that time, would have been rebuked by every NT Writer concerning any opposition to their teaching concerning the “End of the Age”. Not one single NT Writer or Yeshua Himself taught eschatological fulfillment to their contemporaries, to be understood and applied to another audience outside their lifetime. I think it is a mistake to forsake this as the start and ending point to understanding the NT Writers eschatological teachings.

Dr. Samuel Lee’s (earliest known modern Preterist) “Preliminary Dissertation” published in 1843 clearly establishes “Preterism” in the early church. In which Eusebius believed “The End” had come.

[robbyyoung]

So when Jesus gave the great commission, Matt. 28, he was referring to the then known world, or Roman empire?

Yes Homer. You do know Yeshua was having a conversation with His Disciples, don't you? Moreover, THEY said it was accomplished.

You have been taught that the great commission is yet future where all of the world will be taught or preached the gospel message of salvation before the end will come. Scripture teaches it already took place? Look up the word world in this scripture- Matthew 24:14 and this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for witness unto all nations; and then the end shall come.

And this was written to the church living in the 1st century. Now here are 4 scriptures, a short list, proving that this scripture has already been fulfilled almost 2,000 years ago.

1. In Matthew 24:14 Jesus promised the gospel would go unto all the world (oikoumene)
In Romans 10:18 Paul stated that the gospel had gone (past tense) into all the world (oikoumene)
2. In Mark 16:15 Jesus prophesied that the gospel would go into all the world (kosmos)
in Colossians 1:6 Paul worte that the gospel went (past tense) into all the world (kosmos)
3. In Mark 16:15 Jesus said the gospel would be preached to all creation (ktisis)
in Colossians 1:23 Paul said the gospel had been (past tense) preached in all creation ( ktisis)
4. in Matthew 28:19 Jesus told the Apostles to teach all nations (ethnos)
in Romans 16:26 Paul declared that the gospel was made known (past tense) to all the nations (ethnos)

Surely Jesus would know there was more to the world than that, seeing as how He was in on the creation. And I would think He would have used "all nations" consistently.

Yeshua was referring to the "End of the Age". Yahweh was finally bringing an end to the Old Covenant, Homer. It seems to me that the Apostles clearly GOT IT RIGHT and weren't confused. And since THEY had the conversation with Yeshua, THEIR testimony before The Lord and the 1st Century church is that the mission was accomplished to bring an end to the age.

God Bless.

[dwilkins]

Can we believe that Eusebius was referring to AD 70 as the time of the downfall of all kingdoms, and the establishment of the godly kingdom? I suspect (though I don't know) that he was alluding to the fall of paganism, as a result of the conversion of Constantine, and the subsequent Christianization of the Empire. It seems inconceivable that the 200 years of persecution of the Church preceding Constantine's conversion would have been described by Eusebius as the season following the fall of all pagan kingdoms. If the kingdoms had fallen, why were the emperors still wasting the saints? Come to think of it, if the kingdoms have fallen, why do many kingdoms still waste the Church? To describe these centuries of persecution as having taken place following the fall of the kingdoms would seem bizarre.

You make a good point. But, my reason for posting Eusebius' quote was to establish that, regardless of when these things happened (70AD, 325AD, etc.) it wasn't considered heretical or out of bounds for him to have said it in his day. And, I was trying to point out that there was not a consensus among prominent Christians regarding eschatology. At the very least, I'm not aware of any of his peers pushing back against this stance of Eusebius in writing.

On a side note, in the blog I posted there is the following quote from Spurgeon,

"Did you ever regret the absence of the burnt-offering, or the red heifer, of any one of the sacrifices and rites of the Jews? Did you ever pine for the feast of tabernacle, or the dedication? No, because, though these were like the old heavens and earth to the Jewish believers, they have passed away and we now live under a new heavens and a new earth, so far as the dispensation of divine teaching is concerned. The substance is come, and the shadow has gone: and we do not remember it."

While he did make that statement, if you read the whole sermon he is clear that he thinks there was the above spiritual fulfillment, but he is also waiting for a physical dissolution of the universe as a literal fulfillment in the future. I haven't found a similar statement from Eusebius, so as far as I can tell his quote exhausts the expectation on his part.

Doug

[steve7150]

Referenced, exegetically, the "Roman Empire" of that then "Known World".

2. Therefore, the prophetic time statements geared to the original audience holds it's integrity, for the NT Writer's testimony upholds the signs given for "The End" in scripture.

So, NO, Loas or any other modern day remote place IS NOT in view regarding what Yeshua and The Apostles preached and taught concerning "The End of the Age", which occurred in 70AD.





Again if God inspired the NT writers and Jesus makes a statement to preach the gospel in all the world, is God aware that there is a world outside of the Roman empire? Throughout the entire bible we have writings directed to an original audience yet these writings were preserved for future generations because it was relevant to everyone.

[jriccitelli]

So, where are the rebuttals from these eyewitnesses? Where is ANYTHING from these eyewitnesses? Do you see the dilemma here?

I had read some of this Preterist rapture thinking before, but I have to admit I do not recall hearing this argument put this way. I have to congratulate you on the argument, because I like the question. It is really interesting because it is almost the reverse of my reason for 'not' believing in the 70ad application of the prophecies. I hadn’t thought of what happened to Timothy or Titus much; I don’t know where did they go? I presumed they went out into the world to make disciples, instead of sitting around posting on the internet (like me). Is it your belief the whole Church was taken at that time? And all thus all they had left were nominal believers and their writings? On another note, I don’t believe the ‘Apostles’ office was meant to grow beyond the 12 (13) Apostles.
I don’t believe in the 70ad application, because from my grazing through the beginnings of Church history, I never came across much of anything from any writers that would say: ‘Look, Christs prophecy of His return, and the end of the age was fulfilled! Look it’s the same with Revelation, see how this all came to past!” I would expect the fulfillments would have been as plain as day, just as the beginning of the end would be clear and discernable: at least like the lesson from the fig tree, that you ‘know’ summer is near. I would think the fulfillment of all this would have been as ‘clear’ to the Christians then and talked about as much as the incarnation and first coming, yet we have volumes of church history who seem to be completely unaware that Jesus already came back and all was fulfilled. Even the Eusebius quote and Josephus argument sound more like saying look dinosaurs evolved from birds! Such an event would have to be clearly, well known, recognized, and proclaimed by the historic Church of that time.

[dwilkins]

Referenced, exegetically, the "Roman Empire" of that then "Known World".

2. Therefore, the prophetic time statements geared to the original audience holds it's integrity, for the NT Writer's testimony upholds the signs given for "The End" in scripture.

So, NO, Loas or any other modern day remote place IS NOT in view regarding what Yeshua and The Apostles preached and taught concerning "The End of the Age", which occurred in 70AD.

Again if God inspired the NT writers and Jesus makes a statement to preach the gospel in all the world, is God aware that there is a world outside of the Roman empire? Throughout the entire bible we have writings directed to an original audience yet these writings were preserved for future generations because it was relevant to everyone.

I think you're conflating two different ideas. Jesus gave a commission and Paul claimed to have fulfilled the terms of it using the same language (implying, in my opinion, that he'd read both Matthew and Mark at the time of his comments). It is not correct to demand that Jesus' language meant more than Paul's use of it. We may want that to be true because we grew up expecting it to be so, but that doesn't make it so. No one is saying that just because the Great Commission was fulfilled in Paul's lifetime and ministry we aren't supposed to continue evangelizing people. In fact, Isaiah 66 describes the time immediately after the day of the Lord, and evangelism is a key part of it:

Isa 66:17 "Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go into the gardens, following one in the midst, eating pig's flesh and the abomination and mice, shall come to an end together, declares the LORD.
Isa 66:18 "For I know their works and their thoughts, and the time is coming to gather all nations and tongues. And they shall come and shall see my glory,
Isa 66:19 and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, who draw the bow, to Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands far away, that have not heard my fame or seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory among the nations.
Isa 66:20 And they shall bring all your brothers from all the nations as an offering to the LORD, on horses and in chariots and in litters and on mules and on dromedaries, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, says the LORD, just as the Israelites bring their grain offering in a clean vessel to the house of the LORD.
Isa 66:21 And some of them also I will take for priests and for Levites, says the LORD.
Isa 66:22 "For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the LORD, so shall your offspring and your name remain.

You are assuming that the Great Commission will be fulfilled before either the end of time or the end of the universe. And, you are assuming that it can't be fulfilled until just before that event. Also, you are assuming that "world" (based on various terms) refers to the physical globe, and so all humans on the globe. However, the Great Commission would be over before the end of the age, not the end of time. The Jews fully expected history to continue in "the age to come". Critically, they expected evangelism to play a major part of history AFTER the day of the Lord. Therefore, the Great Commission could be fulfilled long before any end of the universe, with evangelism going on afterwards. If all of your assumptions were correct, you'd be indisputably correct. But, there is no scriptural or logical warrant for any of your assumptions.

That doesn't mean that we can't draw principles from eras of scripture that are over. And, it doesn't mean we don't continue evangelizing. It just means it isn't part of the Great Commission.

Doug

[steve7150]

It is not correct to demand that Jesus' language meant more than Paul's use of it. We may want that to be true because we grew up expecting it to be so, but that doesn't make it so.







Didn't Jesus also say "to make disciples of all the nations"? How do you figure Rome to meet that command?

[robbyyoung]

So, where are the rebuttals from these eyewitnesses? Where is ANYTHING from these eyewitnesses? Do you see the dilemma here?

I had read some of this Preterist rapture thinking before, but I have to admit I do not recall hearing this argument put this way. I have to congratulate you on the argument, because I like the question. It is really interesting because it is almost the reverse of my reason for 'not' believing in the 70ad application of the prophecies. I hadn’t thought of what happened to Timothy or Titus much; I don’t know where did they go? I presumed they went out into the world to make disciples, instead of sitting around posting on the internet (like me). Is it your belief the whole Church was taken at that time? And all thus all they had left were nominal believers and their writings? On another note, I don’t believe the ‘Apostles’ office was meant to grow beyond the 12 (13) Apostles.
I don’t believe in the 70ad application, because from my grazing through the beginnings of Church history, I never came across much of anything from any writers that would say: ‘Look, Christs prophecy of His return, and the end of the age was fulfilled! Look it’s the same with Revelation, see how this all came to past!” I would expect the fulfillments would have been as plain as day, just as the beginning of the end would be clear and discernable: at least like the lesson from the fig tree, that you ‘know’ summer is near. I would think the fulfillment of all this would have been as ‘clear’ to the Christians then and talked about as much as the incarnation and first coming, yet we have volumes of church history who seem to be completely unaware that Jesus already came back and all was fulfilled. Even the Eusebius quote and Josephus argument sound more like saying look dinosaurs evolved from birds! Such an event would have to be clearly, well known, recognized, and proclaimed by the historic Church of that time.

Hi JR,

I'll respond to your questions here: http://theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=4018

God Bless.