Announcement

Collapse

Eschatology 201 Guidelines

This area of the forum is primarily for Christian theists to discuss orthodox views of Eschatology. Other theist participation is welcome within that framework, but only within orthodoxy. Posts from nontheists that do not promote atheism or seek to undermine the faith of others will be permitted at the Moderator's discretion - such posters should contact the area moderators before posting.


Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.

However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.

End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.

Millennialism- post-, pre- a-

Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.

From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.

OK folks, let's roll!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Special place in hell (for preterists)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Darfius
    replied
    Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
    So you finally quote an actual source instead of assuming modern generation is the same as ancient....

    And, it disagrees with what Darfius posted (unless I misread his meaning). He quoted Scripture where Moses says it's 70 or 80 years. Jesus didn't say it would start "before the next generation begins" he said ..."this generation will not pass away". I take that to mean that it would happen before everyone hearing him passes away. So, again, fits with preterism.
    Yes, that was the meaning of what I posted and I agree with what you say here, even that it "fits with preterism". But as I posted elsewhere, Scripture says first tribulation would come "to the Jew" and "then to the Gentile", which means double fulfillment. In support of that:

    Scripture Verse: Jeremiah 25

    12 “But when the seventy years are fulfilled, I will punish the king of Babylon and his nation, the land of the Babylonians, for their guilt,” declares the Lord, “and will make it desolate forever. 13 I will bring on that land all the things I have spoken against it, all that are written in this book and prophesied by Jeremiah against all the nations. 14 They themselves will be enslaved by many nations and great kings; I will repay them according to their deeds and the work of their hands.”

    The Cup of God’s Wrath

    15 This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, said to me: “Take from my hand this cup filled with the wine of my wrath and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it. 16 When they drink it, they will stagger and go mad because of the sword I will send among them.”
    17 So I took the cup from the Lord’s hand and made all the nations to whom he sent me drink it: 18 Jerusalem and the towns of Judah the Jew first], its kings and officials, to make them a ruin and an object of horror and scorn, a curse—as they are today; 19 Pharaoh king of Egypt, his attendants, his officials and all his people, 20 and all the foreign people there; all the kings of Uz; all the kings of the Philistines (those of Ashkelon, Gaza, Ekron, and the people left at Ashdod); 21 Edom, Moab and Ammon; 22 all the kings of Tyre and Sidon; the kings of the coastlands across the sea; 23 Dedan, Tema, Buz and all who are in distant places; 24 all the kings of Arabia and all the kings of the foreign people who live in the wilderness; 25 all the kings of Zimri, Elam and Media; 26 and all the kings of the north, near and far, one after the other—all the kingdoms on the face of the earth. And after all of them, the king of Sheshak [Babylon] will drink it too.
    27 “Then tell them, ‘This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: Drink, get drunk and vomit, and fall to rise no more because of the sword I will send among you.’ 28 But if they refuse to take the cup from your hand and drink, tell them, ‘This is what the Lord Almighty says: You must drink it! 29 See, I am beginning to bring disaster on the city that bears my Name, and will you indeed go unpunished? You will not go unpunished, for I am calling down a sword on all who live on the earth, declares the Lord Almighty.’
    30 “Now prophesy all these words against them and say to them:
    “‘The Lord will roar from on high;
    he will thunder from his holy dwelling
    and roar mightily against his land.
    He will shout like those who tread the grapes,
    shout against all who live on the earth.
    31
    The tumult will resound to the ends of the earth,
    for the Lord will bring charges against the nations;
    he will bring judgment on all mankind

    and put the wicked to the sword,’”
    declares the Lord.

    © Copyright Original Source



    Scripture Verse: Revelation 16

    19 The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God remembered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath.

    © Copyright Original Source

    Leave a comment:


  • Littlejoe
    replied
    Originally posted by seanD View Post
    Jews and generations..



    And they obviously don't have any sort of eschatological bias. If you have a better source, put up or shut up.
    So you finally quote an actual source instead of assuming modern generation is the same as ancient....

    And, it disagrees with what Darfius posted (unless I misread his meaning). He quoted Scripture where Moses says it's 70 or 80 years. Jesus didn't say it would start "before the next generation begins" he said ..."this generation will not pass away". I take that to mean that it would happen before everyone hearing him passes away. So, again, fits with preterism.

    Leave a comment:


  • seanD
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    See, this is a perfect example of why it's generally not worth my time to explain things to you. Rather than studying ancient culture and scholarly works, you make up a number based on modern American culture, blithely assume that it holds for an entirely different time and culture, and then handwave away arguments to the contrary.
    Jews and generations..

    The number of years that elapse before the children of one set of human beings arrive at a marriageable age. This number has been defined to be equal to the average male age at marriage, plus one year before child-bearing begins, plus half the average number of years during which fecundity lasts. As a rule, Jews marry much earlier than the rest of the male population among which they dwell, probably owing to the rabbinic requirement that a man should marry before attaining the age of twenty (Ḳid. 29b). On the other hand, their fecundity is greater; therefore the time of fertility of the female is longer; but exact figures concerning this detail are not available. From such data as are obtainable it appears that Jews marry at the age of twenty-two, as compared with twenty-nine for the rest of the population (Mayo-Smith, "Science of Statistics," i. 103); while fertility lasts, on an average, for fourteen years after marriage, as compared with twelve among non-Jews (ib. 113). This would give the length of a generation among Jews as thirty years, as compared with thirty-six in the remaining population.
    And they obviously don't have any sort of eschatological bias. If you have a better source, put up or shut up.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darfius
    replied
    Originally posted by eschaton View Post
    The thing to remember is that the OT should be interpreted spiritually. People like Justin Martyr and Irenaeus agreed with this.
    While Justin Martyr and Irenaeus can provide interesting information about the beliefs and practices of the early church, their beliefs and practices are in no way authoritative independent of Scriptural support. "Tradition" is the way the Jews and Catholics perverted the truth into Babylonian knockoffs.

    Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

    I guess if the scriptures were to be understood literally the Jews would have understood who Jesus was. Seeing they couldn't see and hearing they couldn't hear.
    "Literally", the Scriptures present both a suffering Messiah and a conquering one. The Jews hoped for and therefore expected the wrong version of the Messiah. Even still, those most educated in Scripture (the Pharisees and Sanhedrin) knew Jesus was the Messiah. They just rejected Him. "It is better for one man to die for the people than that the whole nation perish." Caiaphas was basically saying, "since Jesus will not be the conquering Messiah we desire, we will help Him be the suffering Messiah He appears to want to be."

    Here is a premillennial question for you.

    Eze 43:7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.

    Most pre-mills believe this is the millennial temple. Heaven and earth flee away after the millennium (Rev 20:11). The New heaven and earth are found in Rev 21. How can Ezekiel's temple be forever if the old earth passes away?
    God says His "dwelling" will be there (on Mt. Zion in Jerusalem), but He does not specify that a specific building will last forever. Actually, according to Scripture, the rebuilt temple will be defiled by the Antichrist, so I'm not sure where the idea came that it would "last forever."

    Leave a comment:


  • seanD
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    See, this is a perfect example of why it's generally not worth my time to explain things to you. Rather than studying ancient culture and scholarly works, you make up a number based on modern American culture, blithely assume that it holds for an entirely different time and culture, and then handwave away arguments to the contrary.
    So you're saying I should accept the argument that the ancient Jews considered a generation 40 years because a bunch of futurists, who believed the countdown to the tribulation was the formation of Israel, made a false prediction about the tribulation happening in the 80s because they also believed that a generation was 40 years?

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by seanD View Post
    I've already told. We consider a generation about 30 years, so I have no reason to believe the ancients considered it any longer than that when they lived shorter lives and had children earlier than we do. Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see any better argument than that, short of actually researching the subject through ancient records themselves or scholarly works; preferably scholars without any eschatological agendas.
    See, this is a perfect example of why it's generally not worth my time to explain things to you. Rather than studying ancient culture and scholarly works, you make up a number based on modern American culture, blithely assume that it holds for an entirely different time and culture, and then handwave away arguments to the contrary.

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by seanD View Post
    So I did understand you correctly, so what was the flak about? I don't agree they're separate subjects. That's ridiculous considering they're in the same context of Paul's discussion.
    What a devastating rebuttal.

    Leave a comment:


  • eschaton
    replied
    Originally posted by Darfius View Post
    You're getting into preterist gibberish/private interpretation territory. You know you have to know how to read before you can push your high and mighty "spiritual" interpretation, right? How much of the letter is too much before it starts to kill? The "law" and "letter" Jesus and Paul were talking about was the "oral law", not the words of God. And who is the arbiter of which "spiritual" interpretation is correct and how much of the words of God should be ignored? Revelation places a curse on anyone "taking away" from Scripture and Jesus said not one jot or tittle would pass away.

    Also, as is my right, duty and pleasure, I shall back you into a corner (in a friendly, loving, instructive way) with Scripture:

    Scripture Verse: Malachi 4

    4 “Remember the law of my servant Moses, the decrees and laws I gave him at Horeb for all Israel.
    5 “See, I will send the prophet Elijah to you before that great and dreadful day of the Lord comes. 6 He will turn the hearts of the parents to their children, and the hearts of the children to their parents; or else I will come and strike the land with total destruction.”

    © Copyright Original Source



    Reminding the people of the law of Moses is clearly part of the job description of the Elijah which preceded the Lord's first coming and the Elijah who will precede His second. That is to say, the opposite of the private interpretation you are pushing. Turns out God did not write Scripture for us to think we know better than what it says, but for us to heed it bearing in mind that of course He means more than merely what is written. But He never means less.
    The thing to remember is that the OT should be interpreted spiritually. People like Justin Martyr and Irenaeus agreed with this.

    Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

    I guess if the scriptures were to be understood literally the Jews would have understood who Jesus was. Seeing they couldn't see and hearing they couldn't hear.

    Here is a premillennial question for you.

    Eze 43:7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.

    Most pre-mills believe this is the millennial temple. Heaven and earth flee away after the millennium (Rev 20:11). The New heaven and earth are found in Rev 21. How can Ezekiel's temple be forever if the old earth passes away?

    Leave a comment:


  • Darfius
    replied
    Scripture Verse: Deuteronomy 32

    45 When Moses finished reciting all these words to all Israel, 46 he said to them, “Take to heart all the words I have solemnly declared to you this day, so that you may command your children to obey carefully all the words of this law. 47 They are not just idle words for you—they are your life. By them you will live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to possess.”

    © Copyright Original Source

    Leave a comment:


  • Darfius
    replied
    Scripture Verse: Psalm 90

    A prayer of Moses the man of God.
    1
    Lord, you have been our dwelling place
    throughout all generations.
    2
    Before the mountains were born
    or you brought forth the whole world,
    from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
    3
    You turn people back to dust,
    saying, “Return to dust, you mortals.”
    4
    A thousand years in your sight
    are like a day that has just gone by,
    or like a watch in the night.
    5
    Yet you sweep people away in the sleep of death—
    they are like the new grass of the morning:
    6
    In the morning it springs up new,
    but by evening it is dry and withered.
    7
    We are consumed by your anger
    and terrified by your indignation.
    8
    You have set our iniquities before you,
    our secret sins in the light of your presence.
    9
    All our days pass away under your wrath;
    we finish our years with a moan.
    10
    Our days may come to seventy years,
    or eighty, if our strength endures
    ;
    yet the best of them are but trouble and sorrow,
    for they quickly pass, and we fly away.
    11
    If only we knew the power of your anger!
    Your wrath is as great as the fear that is your due.
    12
    Teach us to number our days,
    that we may gain a heart of wisdom
    .
    13
    Relent, Lord! How long will it be?
    Have compassion on your servants.
    14
    Satisfy us in the morning with your unfailing love,
    that we may sing for joy and be glad all our days.
    15
    Make us glad for as many days as you have afflicted us,
    for as many years as we have seen trouble.
    16
    May your deeds be shown to your servants,
    your splendor to their children.
    17
    May the favor of the Lord our God rest on us;
    establish the work of our hands for us—
    yes, establish the work of our hands.

    © Copyright Original Source

    Leave a comment:


  • seanD
    replied
    Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
    Ok, got it. Futurists who got any Biblical prophecy wrong are wrong about everything they write...Ok, NP. Tell me Sean, since you've ducked this question multiple times...how long is a generation in Jesus time? All you've done so far is just tell me I'm wrong. Where's your proof I'm wrong except your begging the question defense?
    I've already told. We consider a generation about 30 years, so I have no reason to believe the ancients considered it any longer than that when they lived shorter lives and had children earlier than we do. Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see any better argument than that, short of actually researching the subject through ancient records themselves or scholarly works; preferably scholars without any eschatological agendas.

    And about the 40 year prediction you referenced, I could have told you they wrong even before they were proven wrong. Firstly, 40 years is not even what we consider a generation as I said. They were obviously doing the same exact thing you're doing, stretching it to try and get it to fit their interpretation. They believed that the formation of Israel in the 40s had some significance to the fig tree reference in the OD, or that's supposedly where the "countdown" started.

    I would have rejected this right from the outset. First of all, when someone... anyone... sets a specific year or date, RUN FOR THE HILLS. At least that's my motto, and I don't care who it is. The fact they picked a specific year -- bzzzz! Wrong. Secondly, they obviously ignored Luke's version where it puts no significance on the fig tree itself ("and all the trees"). So the fact Luke's version is not consistent with the others, means it had nothing to do with the formation of Israel. Jesus was just using it as an illustration of forecasting the situation. He was saying you will know when he's "at the door" when you see the signs, much like knowing when a certain season is near. My interpretation of that is he meant you will know the generation, not any specific year.

    Leave a comment:


  • Littlejoe
    replied
    Originally posted by seanD View Post
    I honestly can't believe... and I'm being serious here... you used that for your argument of why a generation should be 40 years in ancient culture and expected me to "concede" that.

    Your problem is you think in black and white. You think every futurist believes the same thing. Why would you believe that when it's obvious there are varying views on this subject between futurists? The Hal Lindseys are not the be-all, end-all of futurist views.

    Obviously they were wrong, because they claimed it would happen in the 80s and it didn't, so that automatically disqualifies their whole interpretation, including what they claimed constituted a generation, as if that was even a plausible argument to begin with. The question is, why are you adopting that erroneous interpretation of a generation and expecting me to accept it?
    Ok, got it. Futurists who got any Biblical prophecy wrong are wrong about everything they write...Ok, NP. Tell me Sean, since you've ducked this question multiple times...how long is a generation in Jesus time? All you've done so far is just tell me I'm wrong. Where's your proof I'm wrong except your begging the question defense?

    Leave a comment:


  • seanD
    replied
    Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
    Whatever bro. I'm using a futurist view and you're a futurist but you think they are wrong and you're laughing at my view...can't make this stuff up...
    I honestly can't believe... and I'm being serious here... you used that for your argument of why a generation should be 40 years in ancient culture and expected me to "concede" that.

    Your problem is you think in black and white. You think every futurist believes the same thing. Why would you believe that when it's obvious there are varying views on this subject between futurists? The Hal Lindseys are not the be-all, end-all of futurist views.

    Obviously they were wrong, because they claimed it would happen in the 80s and it didn't, so that automatically disqualifies their whole interpretation, including what they claimed constituted a generation, as if that was even a plausible argument to begin with. The question is, why are you adopting that erroneous interpretation of a generation and expecting me to accept it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Littlejoe
    replied
    Originally posted by seanD View Post
    Bro, you're using a futurist interpretation (which is most likely wrong) of what they believe constitutes a generation for a preterist interpretation of a generation? Wow
    Whatever bro. I'm using a futurist view and you're a futurist but you think they are wrong and you're laughing at my view...can't make this stuff up...

    Leave a comment:


  • Darfius
    replied
    Originally posted by eschaton View Post
    I think Paul is clear about how the scriptures should be understood.

    2 Corinthians 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

    He also makes it clear that it is about how the scriptures are understood.

    2 Cor 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.

    John the Baptist was asked if he was Elias and he denied it.

    John 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

    But Jesus said:

    Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.

    Jesus called for spiritual understanding. John the Baptist came in the spirit and power of Elias.

    Luke 1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

    To depend on the letter brings death.

    Romans 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
    You're getting into preterist gibberish/private interpretation territory. You know you have to know how to read before you can push your high and mighty "spiritual" interpretation, right? How much of the letter is too much before it starts to kill? The "law" and "letter" Jesus and Paul were talking about was the "oral law", not the words of God. And who is the arbiter of which "spiritual" interpretation is correct and how much of the words of God should be ignored? Revelation places a curse on anyone "taking away" from Scripture and Jesus said not one jot or tittle would pass away.

    Also, as is my right, duty and pleasure, I shall back you into a corner (in a friendly, loving, instructive way) with Scripture:

    Scripture Verse: Malachi 4

    4 “Remember the law of my servant Moses, the decrees and laws I gave him at Horeb for all Israel.
    5 “See, I will send the prophet Elijah to you before that great and dreadful day of the Lord comes. 6 He will turn the hearts of the parents to their children, and the hearts of the children to their parents; or else I will come and strike the land with total destruction.”

    © Copyright Original Source



    Reminding the people of the law of Moses is clearly part of the job description of the Elijah which preceded the Lord's first coming and the Elijah who will precede His second. That is to say, the opposite of the private interpretation you are pushing. Turns out God did not write Scripture for us to think we know better than what it says, but for us to heed it bearing in mind that of course He means more than merely what is written. But He never means less.

    Leave a comment:

widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Working...
X