You and other folks have such a strong desire to discredit preterism. Why is that? We simply believe that when the apostles said His coming was at hand,
We have been over this countless times as preterism has no answers for
An end to evil
a millineum period of long duration , not 40 years as preterism's default position is
Many references to a second coming, even starting in Isa 53 where we have both a suffering servant contrasted with a royal figure.
Raising of the dead
Judgment day
His near term "coming" was a 70AD judgment on Jerusalem, not the judgment of everyone in the world as preterism claims.
I've seen your responses to the above and have no interest in debating again so you may have the last word, blessings Steve
Curious...
Re: Curious...
Looks like you're getting a bit riled, Mel. You are asking yourself, "Why do I bother trying to reach you folks with Scripture?" I ask you the same question. If people aren't interested in your wacky idea that Christ returned in 70 A.D., with absolutely no historical evidence of the same, why don't you give up your attempt to convince them?
Matthew 24:
27 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.
Each day the lighting of the sun comes from the east and shines to the west. It's obvious; everyone sees it. So shall it be when Christ comes again. Everyone will know it. If that had happened in 70 A.D. there would have been many people writing about it, and second century Christian writers such as Justin Martyr and Irenaeus would have been aware of it and would not have been expecting Christ's coming future to their own day.
That is really all that is needed to prove the idea as ludicrous.
However it is quite clear that no one experienced the following either, or there would have been some historical evidence of it happening:
29 "immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken;
30 then will appear the sign of the son of man in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory;
31 and he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
It makes more sense to me to believe that the writer to the Hebrews which you quoted, as well as other Christians in his day were expecting the imminent return of Christ, but were mistaken.
As for Jesus, He said Himself that He didn't know when He was going to return:
Matthew 24:36 “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.
Yet, in spite of this, even He expected a soon return. I don't find it at all embarrasing that Jesus didn't know when He would return. While He was on earth, He was not omnipotent. Indeed, it seems that He didn't know even AFTER He was raised from the dead, if we can accept the words of John in Revelation 1:1
The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants what must soon take place; and he made it known by sending his angel to his servant John...
Clearly John said that God gave a revelation to Jesus Christ to show his servant what must soon take place (John, too, thought the events were to take place soon). Then Jesus sent his angel to John, show him by visions what would happen, and Christ even appeared to John in a vision Himself, instructing him what to write to the seven churches.
Matthew 24:
27 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.
Each day the lighting of the sun comes from the east and shines to the west. It's obvious; everyone sees it. So shall it be when Christ comes again. Everyone will know it. If that had happened in 70 A.D. there would have been many people writing about it, and second century Christian writers such as Justin Martyr and Irenaeus would have been aware of it and would not have been expecting Christ's coming future to their own day.
That is really all that is needed to prove the idea as ludicrous.
However it is quite clear that no one experienced the following either, or there would have been some historical evidence of it happening:
29 "immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken;
30 then will appear the sign of the son of man in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory;
31 and he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
It makes more sense to me to believe that the writer to the Hebrews which you quoted, as well as other Christians in his day were expecting the imminent return of Christ, but were mistaken.
As for Jesus, He said Himself that He didn't know when He was going to return:
Matthew 24:36 “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.
Yet, in spite of this, even He expected a soon return. I don't find it at all embarrasing that Jesus didn't know when He would return. While He was on earth, He was not omnipotent. Indeed, it seems that He didn't know even AFTER He was raised from the dead, if we can accept the words of John in Revelation 1:1
The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants what must soon take place; and he made it known by sending his angel to his servant John...
Clearly John said that God gave a revelation to Jesus Christ to show his servant what must soon take place (John, too, thought the events were to take place soon). Then Jesus sent his angel to John, show him by visions what would happen, and Christ even appeared to John in a vision Himself, instructing him what to write to the seven churches.
Re: Curious...
Paidion wrote:
TK
Amen brother.If people aren't interested in your wacky idea that Christ returned in 70 A.D., with absolutely no historical evidence of the same, why don't you give up your attempt to convince them?
TK
Re: Curious...
You guys are all right. There is no point being here any more because of the following:
As long as you continue to interpret the Bible using a 20th century Western cultural and scientific understanding to unmask ancient Eastern Hebrew idioms, metaphors, symbolism, and figures, you have zero chance to understand that the "world" means the old covenant world of Judaism, that "elements" mean pertain to the Law, that those "who pierced Him" pertain to the apostate Jews that DID have Him pierced, and that judgment applied to those apostate Jews who persecuted the Lord's church.
As long as you refuse to recognize the TIMING of the parousia event, you will be at a total loss in understanding the event. The physical runs your entire paradigm. Try the biblical sometime.
Goodbye!
STEVE PLEASE DELETE MY ACCOUNT PERMANENTLY.
As long as you continue to interpret the Bible using a 20th century Western cultural and scientific understanding to unmask ancient Eastern Hebrew idioms, metaphors, symbolism, and figures, you have zero chance to understand that the "world" means the old covenant world of Judaism, that "elements" mean pertain to the Law, that those "who pierced Him" pertain to the apostate Jews that DID have Him pierced, and that judgment applied to those apostate Jews who persecuted the Lord's church.
As long as you refuse to recognize the TIMING of the parousia event, you will be at a total loss in understanding the event. The physical runs your entire paradigm. Try the biblical sometime.
Goodbye!
STEVE PLEASE DELETE MY ACCOUNT PERMANENTLY.
Re: Curious...
Not sure if you will see this Mellontes, but anyways...
Your behavior makes me chuckle. I really admire your passion on this subject. You express yourself very well and you obviously have your ducks in a row when it comes to explaining your position.
But you have to understand that it is an extreme minority position. Not that that makes it wrong- of course it doesn't. But nonetheless you have to admit that you have a huge problem in convincing probably 98% of Christians that Jesus ain't comin' back. Sorry, it won't happen.
But yet you get offended when we don't just fall down and worship your arguments and kick ourselves in the rear for being so dense and stupid our entire Christian lives.
Why be offended? You see, for me at least, I could care less if you are wrong or if your are right. Yes, I do believe that Jesus is coming back. But I don't base my Christian walk on that fact. I think that is what Michelle was getting at. EVEN IF I WHOLEHEARTEDLY ACCEPTED YOUR POSITION, I do not see how in any way it would affect my daily walk with the Lord. I would be bummed out for a little while that I wouldn't get to experience the Lord's return, but what the heck I might die before that happens anyways.
So I have always struggled with why you are so very very VERY passionate about this subject. To me, it would be like being passionate about who wrote the book of Hebrews. Does it matter? I know you say it matters, but really it doesn't. We are supposed to be sold out for our Lord even when we don't know all the facts for sure 100%. So I accept you may be right about preterism, but in the end it really doesn't matter. If He's already returned, fine. I still have to live for Him. If He is yet to return, the same holds true.
Get it?
TK
Your behavior makes me chuckle. I really admire your passion on this subject. You express yourself very well and you obviously have your ducks in a row when it comes to explaining your position.
But you have to understand that it is an extreme minority position. Not that that makes it wrong- of course it doesn't. But nonetheless you have to admit that you have a huge problem in convincing probably 98% of Christians that Jesus ain't comin' back. Sorry, it won't happen.
But yet you get offended when we don't just fall down and worship your arguments and kick ourselves in the rear for being so dense and stupid our entire Christian lives.
Why be offended? You see, for me at least, I could care less if you are wrong or if your are right. Yes, I do believe that Jesus is coming back. But I don't base my Christian walk on that fact. I think that is what Michelle was getting at. EVEN IF I WHOLEHEARTEDLY ACCEPTED YOUR POSITION, I do not see how in any way it would affect my daily walk with the Lord. I would be bummed out for a little while that I wouldn't get to experience the Lord's return, but what the heck I might die before that happens anyways.
So I have always struggled with why you are so very very VERY passionate about this subject. To me, it would be like being passionate about who wrote the book of Hebrews. Does it matter? I know you say it matters, but really it doesn't. We are supposed to be sold out for our Lord even when we don't know all the facts for sure 100%. So I accept you may be right about preterism, but in the end it really doesn't matter. If He's already returned, fine. I still have to live for Him. If He is yet to return, the same holds true.
Get it?
TK
Re: Curious...
Oh, good gravy...Mellontes wrote:You guys are all right. There is no point being here any more because of the following:
As long as you continue to interpret the Bible using a 20th century Western cultural and scientific understanding to unmask ancient Eastern Hebrew idioms, metaphors, symbolism, and figures, you have zero chance to understand that the "world" means the old covenant world of Judaism, that "elements" mean pertain to the Law, that those "who pierced Him" pertain to the apostate Jews that DID have Him pierced, and that judgment applied to those apostate Jews who persecuted the Lord's church.
As long as you refuse to recognize the TIMING of the parousia event, you will be at a total loss in understanding the event. The physical runs your entire paradigm. Try the biblical sometime.
Goodbye!
STEVE PLEASE DELETE MY ACCOUNT PERMANENTLY.