Ten reasons why there is no Millennium.

[Esther]

I think that the prophets Daniel and Jesus―and the Preterists and DaveL―are correct.

Everything that Jesus predicted in Matthew 24 about the end of the world―i.,e., the end of their world of the Temple and Mosaic sacrificial system―has already happened, ending with the destruction of the Temple.

Thus Jesus was not a false prophet, but a true prophet―some people who listened to him teach Matthew 24 were still alive when his prophecies came true forty years later.

One good resource on this is Jonathan Welton's book Raptureless.

Matthew 24 is speaking about the 70AD destruction of the temple and the time of the great tribulation (a time such as has never been and no never shall be again) and the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ surely?

World War 1 and World War 2 made the 70AD destruction of the temple look like a side show, so the destruction of 70AD alone could not have been what Jesus was discussing only in Matthew 24.


The elementary teachings about Christ is listed in Hebrews 6: 1-4:

6 Therefore let us get past the elementary stage in the teachings about the Christ, advancing on to maturity and perfection and spiritual completeness, [doing this] without laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, ² of teaching about washings (ritual purifications), the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. [These are all important matters in which you should have been proficient long ago.]

We need to at least have a good understanding of the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgement.

Preterists have allegorised the teachings of the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ to such an esoteric extent that the poor man in the street will never understand this teaching. I am by no means very clever but also not very stupid and I have actually tried to grasp this preterist teaching and it has left me completely confused and not a bit annoyed at the time I wasted when the clear reading and teaching of the NT in no way supports this view.

The pre-tribulation view is also flawed in many respects not least being that there are saints during the tribulation period.

The pre-wrath view is the most Biblically accurate view where Christians are taken up to meet the Lord in the air before God pours His wrath on the ungodly.

The moment a doctrine becomes so convoluted that the majority of believers will not be able to understand it, is the moment it should be clear that it is not a doctrine from the Lord but from man's intellect. Not the plain teaching of the NT.

[Littlejoe]

Matthew 24 is speaking about the 70AD destruction of the temple and the time of the great tribulation (a time such as has never been and no never shall be again) and the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ surely?

World War 1 and World War 2 made the 70AD destruction of the temple look like a side show, so the destruction of 70AD alone could not have been what Jesus was discussing only in Matthew 24.


The elementary teachings about Christ is listed in Hebrews 6: 1-4:

6 Therefore let us get past the elementary stage in the teachings about the Christ, advancing on to maturity and perfection and spiritual completeness, [doing this] without laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, ² of teaching about washings (ritual purifications), the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. [These are all important matters in which you should have been proficient long ago.]

We need to at least have a good understanding of the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgement.

Preterists have allegorised the teachings of the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ to such an esoteric extent that the poor man in the street will never understand this teaching. I am by no means very clever but also not very stupid and I have actually tried to grasp this preterist teaching and it has left me completely confused and not a bit annoyed at the time I wasted when the clear reading and teaching of the NT in no way supports this view.

The pre-tribulation view is also flawed in many respects not least being that there are saints during the tribulation period.

The pre-wrath view is the most Biblically accurate view where Christians are taken up to meet the Lord in the air before God pours His wrath on the ungodly.

The moment a doctrine becomes so convoluted that the majority of believers will not be able to understand it, is the moment it should be clear that it is not a doctrine from the Lord but from man's intellect. Not the plain teaching of the NT.

It's truly sad that people think that "the clear reading and teaching of the NT in no way supports this view." when quite the opposite is true. Futurism is so fraught with error, it boggles the mind where to start. When you read in Matthew 24:34 - 35: 34) Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

“Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things [not “some” things] take place."

Everywhere Jesus uses the phrase “this generation” it always means (without exception) the AD 30 – AD 70 contemporary generation He is speaking to. How futurist ignore this is beyond comprehesion. In Matt. 24, Jesus is answering the disciples question(s) as to WHEN the Temple would be destroyed in connection with some signs that would precede His coming and end of the (old covenant) age. These are the “all these things” in this context and Jesus clearly states “all” of these events would be fulfilled in that AD 30 – AD 70 “this generation.”

[GKC_fan]

The pre-wrath view is the most Biblically accurate view where Christians are taken up to meet the Lord in the air before God pours His wrath on the ungodly.

IVP's book The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views is excellent on the subject.

One of the contributors points out that that phrase in Thessalonians "we will meet the Lord (in the air)" is not the common "meet." It was a special Greek "meet" used for meeting and welcoming visiting dignitaries to your city and giving them a VIP escort back into the city. It's also used in Acts 28:15 - And the brothers [in Rome], when they heard about us, came as far as the Forum of Appius and Three Taverns to meet us [and escort us into Rome].

So the implication in Thessalonians is that the believers meeting Jesus in the clouds will escort him back to Earth.

Matthew 24 is speaking about the 70AD destruction of the temple and the time of the great tribulation (a time such as has never been and no never shall be again) and the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ surely?

World War 1 and World War 2 made the 70AD destruction of the temple look like a side show, so the destruction of 70AD alone could not have been what Jesus was discussing only in Matthew 24.

Biblical prophecies sometimes have multiple occurrences, at least in principle if not in detail. Partly because the devil is going to keep using and refining tactics that have worked for him in the past.

The moment a doctrine becomes so convoluted that the majority of believers will not be able to understand it, is the moment it should be clear that it is not a doctrine from the Lord but from man's intellect. Not the plain teaching of the NT.

This is a very sound principle!

[tabibito]

It's truly sad that people think that "the clear reading and teaching of the NT in no way supports this view." when quite the opposite is true. Futurism is so fraught with error, it boggles the mind where to start. When you read in Matthew 24:34 - 35: 34) Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

“Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things [not “some” things] take place."

Everywhere Jesus uses the phrase “this generation” it always means (without exception) the AD 30 – AD 70 contemporary generation He is speaking to. How futurist ignore this is beyond comprehesion. In Matt. 24, Jesus is answering the disciples question(s) as to WHEN the Temple would be destroyed in connection with some signs that would precede His coming and end of the (old covenant) age. These are the “all these things” in this context and Jesus clearly states “all” of these events would be fulfilled in that AD 30 – AD 70 “this generation.”

In each occurrence, "this generation" is the generation comprising the topic. The generation comprising the topic in Matthew 24: 34-35 is the generation "that sees these things." That Jesus is speaking of the generation present at the time of speaking is not at all certain. I cannot recall any time in history that matches the description of the events outlined by Christ in this pericope.

[GKC_fan]

The generation comprising the topic in Matthew 24: 34-35 is "the generation that sees these things." That Jesus is speaking of the generation present at the time of speaking is not at all certain. I cannot recall any time in history that matches the description of the events outlined by Christ in this pericope.

Jonathan Welton's book Raptureless, among others, shows it. The 1st edition is free to download.

[Faber]

I browsed his first edition online. It looks worth taking the time to download it and read the entire text. Although I have some disagreements, it looks as if he covered Matthew 24 and the period from AD 66-70 very thoroughly.

[tabibito]

I browsed his first edition online. It looks worth taking the time to download it and read the entire text. Although I have some disagreements, it looks as if he covered Matthew 24 and the period from AD 66-70 very thoroughly.

I have to admit that he makes a better case than any I've seen before. Reading with interest.

[GKC_fan]

I browsed his first edition online. It looks worth taking the time to download it and read the entire text. Although I have some disagreements, it looks as if he covered Matthew 24 and the period from AD 66-70 very thoroughly.

I have to admit that he makes a better case than any I've seen before. Reading with interest.

Great. I'm always glad to find or introduce someone else to a good book. :-D IMO he's an excellent writer and thinker. His testimony is also pretty amazing.

Another idea on the theme of Jesus returning is a quote I heard recently: "Jesus has already returned to Earth, and millions of times. He returns [and gets welcomed in, per my earlier post] each time someone gets born again."

I'll be interested to hear your further comments and thoughts.

[tabibito]

Great. I'm always glad to find or introduce someone else to a good book. :-D IMO he's an excellent writer and thinker. His testimony is also pretty amazing.

Another idea on the theme of Jesus returning is a quote I heard recently: "Jesus has already returned to Earth, and millions of times. He returns [and gets welcomed in, per my earlier post] each time someone gets born again."

I'll be interested to hear your further comments and thoughts.

Might have to wait a while: I'm overdue on an assignment.

[Darfius]

It's truly sad that people think that "the clear reading and teaching of the NT in no way supports this view." when quite the opposite is true. Futurism is so fraught with error, it boggles the mind where to start. When you read in Matthew 24:34 - 35: 34) Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

“Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things [not “some” things] take place."

Everywhere Jesus uses the phrase “this generation” it always means (without exception) the AD 30 – AD 70 contemporary generation He is speaking to. How futurist ignore this is beyond comprehesion. In Matt. 24, Jesus is answering the disciples question(s) as to WHEN the Temple would be destroyed in connection with some signs that would precede His coming and end of the (old covenant) age. These are the “all these things” in this context and Jesus clearly states “all” of these events would be fulfilled in that AD 30 – AD 70 “this generation.”

Scripture Verse: Mark 8:38

For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man also will be ashamed of him, when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels."

© Copyright Original Source

So as soon as that generation died, Jesus' warning here expired? It's ok to be ashamed of Him now? Or was your claim easily disproven? Keep up the dishonesty, you might fool someone before God holds you accountable for it.

What is a "generation" to an eternal God? As I covered here, it is primarily a certain offspring, not a certain time period. Genesis talks about the "generations" of Adam, the men he produced. The men he generated. When Jesus speaks of "this generation", He is speaking of the people of God's chosen nation who should know better. That application even applies to so-called Christians of today's "generation".

As Esther already pointed out and you ignored because you (and no other preterist) could not possibly address it, the 1st century most certainly was not an unparalleled time of disaster in human history, nor was it like "the days of Noah" when humanity would nearly be wiped out.

[GKC_fan]

Scripture Verse: Mark 8:38

For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man also will be ashamed of him, when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels."

© Copyright Original Source

So as soon as that generation died, Jesus' warning here expired? It's ok to be ashamed of Him now?

No, of course not. God's (general) principles and commands apply to everyone, everywhere. But just because a prophecy or statement also has a later application doesn't make it untrue for the original audience.

. . . The 1st century most certainly was not an unparalleled time of disaster in human history, nor was it like "the days of Noah" when humanity would nearly be wiped out.

For the Jews it was.

Remember, devout non-Messianic Jews were taught that all Gentiles, and their countries and cultures and history and events, were at best worthless and inconsequential, at worst God hated them. "Who cares what happens to them," was their attitude; "anyway, they deserve it because they aren't converting to Judaism; they are enemies of God." The Jews were the only official representatives of God's (not yet Messianic) Kingdom and Truth on earth, the epitome of life and civilization and culture, and thus in their view they were the only people and nation and culture that mattered at all. Everyone else could and should go to sheol, was the view of many of them.

And the Roman Empire was the worst, because not only had they conquered God's Chosen People and ruled them politically, they often openly mocked and despised and spit on the Chosen People and their religion. Emperor Caligula decreed that his statue would be set up in the Temple and have sacrifices made to it. So to be occupied and ruled and mocked by pagan, idol-worshipping Rome was, to devout Jews, a national and religious disaster and a disgrace and judgement from God.

Then in the First Jewish Revolt, the entire country was overrun and brutally terrorized by the Roman legions, with hundreds of thousands of Jews killed or sold into slavery.

And then for the Temple to be destroyed by pagan enemies!?! As well as the entire sacrificial system and priesthood? Nothing could be worse.

To them it was indeed the end of everything in the world that mattered, the end of God's reign on Earth, and the complete defeat and destruction of the forces of Light by the hordes of Darkness and Evil.

[Darfius]

No, of course not. God's (general) principles and commands apply to everyone, everywhere. But just because a prophecy or statement also has a later application doesn't make it untrue for the original audience.

"doesn't make it untrue for the original audience" is quite different from "only applies to the original audience", is it not? I see elsewhere you acknowledge the possibility of double fulfillment, which I have proven elsewhere and which Littlejoe tried unsuccessfully to deny here.

For the Jews it was.

Remember, devout non-Messianic Jews were taught that all Gentiles, and their countries and cultures and history and events, were at best worthless and inconsequential, at worst God hated them. "Who cares what happens to them," was their attitude; "anyway, they deserve it because they aren't converting to Judaism; they are enemies of God." The Jews were the only official representatives of God's (not yet Messianic) Kingdom and Truth on earth, the epitome of life and civilization and culture, and thus in their view they were the only people and nation and culture that mattered at all. Everyone else could and should go to sheol, was the view of many of them.

And the Roman Empire was the worst, because not only had they conquered God's Chosen People and ruled them politically, they often openly mocked and despised and spit on the Chosen People and their religion. Emperor Caligula decreed that his statue would be set up in the Temple and have sacrifices made to it. So to be occupied and ruled and mocked by pagan, idol-worshipping Rome was, to devout Jews, a national and religious disaster and a disgrace and judgement from God.

Then in the First Jewish Revolt, the entire country was overrun and brutally terrorized by the Roman legions, with hundreds of thousands of Jews killed or sold into slavery.

And then for the Temple to be destroyed by pagan enemies!?! As well as the entire sacrificial system and priesthood? Nothing could be worse.

To them it was indeed the end of everything in the world that mattered, the end of God's reign on Earth, and the complete defeat and destruction of the forces of Light by the hordes of Darkness and Evil.

God didn't write the Bible based on what the Jews thought. Not sure why I have to say that out loud. Jesus didn't mean "[from the point of view of the Jews] if those days had not been shortened, no flesh would survive".

The problem on this site (one of many) is that when I say "God wrote the Bible", fewer people take that claim seriously than should be the case if all the professing Christians actually were so. It's all well and good to educate yourself on the socio-historical context, but as honest folks like Esther, sean and I have pointed out before, claiming "the stars will fall from the sky" is an allegory for some dudes passing out is just dishonesty, not an honest attempt to assess the text. God chose His words very carefully.

In fact, in the "days of Noah", God's people were saved while the rest of mankind was destroyed, so that's the exact WRONG simile to use if you wish to say that God's people will be destroyed while the world goes merrily on.

[rogue06]

For those saying that there isn't a millennium I'd like to see them explain this:

millenium-falcon-pembroke.jpg

[Esther]

... the 1st century most certainly was not an unparalleled time of disaster in human history, nor was it like "the days of Noah" when humanity would nearly be wiped out.

Thanks Darfius , I like your word, "unparalleled". How anyone can think the destruction of the temple in 70AD was the worst thing that has ever happened in the history of the world totally flaws me.

Matthew 24:21:For ^[d]at that time there will be a great tribulation (pressure, distress, oppression), such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will [again].

This is of course just one of the many many things that bewilder me about the doctrine of preterism.

The second coming of Christ has already taken place? Is the preterist gospel along the lines of Jesus was born, died resurrected and has returned?

Why was the biggest event that ever could take place not recorded?? The Lord Jesus Christ coming on the clouds of glory with his host of angels as King of Kings and Lord of Lords...
Jude 1:14-15:¹⁴ It was of these people, moreover, that Enoch in the seventh [generation] from Adam prophesied when he said, Behold, the Lord comes with His myriads of holy ones (ten thousands of His saints)

The Apostle's Creed. Do preterists believe in this creed? And so on.

[Faber]

For those saying that there isn't a millennium I'd like to see them explain this:

millenium-falcon-pembroke.jpg

mt.jpg
Or how about the Millennium Tower in San Francisco. You know, the one that is slowly sinking and tilted?