Special place in hell (for preterists)

[Littlejoe]

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.

[Darfius]

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

But when the seventy years are fulfilledthe cupJerusalem and the towns of Judah the Jew first]all the kingdoms on the face of the earth. And after all of them, the king of Sheshak [Babylon] will drink it too. 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 AlmightyThe 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

© 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

[seanD]

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.

Okay, then I'm out.

[Littlejoe]

Okay, then I'm out.

Why? Because even Darfius disagree's with you? After thinking about it, I don't think how long a generation is, is that important but how long those of the generation hearing it (or seeing it when it happens) live is what the text says to me.

[eschaton]

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.



"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."



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."

God is in the millennial temple in Eze 43. read it closely.

43:4 And the glory of the Lord came into the house by the way of the gate whose prospect is toward the east.
5 So the spirit took me up, and brought me into the inner court; and, behold, the glory of the Lord filled the house.
6 And I heard him speaking unto me out of the house; and the man stood by me.
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.

The saints and martyrs, while not considered inerrant, based their beliefs on the teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Not all of Jesus' teachings are in the Bible (John 21:25). The Bible is simply tradition written down. The Ethiopian eunuch needed apostolic teaching (Acts 8). He couldn't understand the OT without apostolic instruction. We shouldn't try that either. Our understanding should be based on Jesus and the apostles (Eph 2:21). The Jews didn't know who Jesus was. The Sanhedrin didn't say anything about Messiah, because he didn't know Messiah would suffer.

Luke 19:44
And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

2 Cor 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.

Before the written tradition of scripture (special revelation) there was the general revelation of God in nature. (Rom1:20, Psa 19:1)
Allegory has rules. Philo of Alexandria says the rules of allegory are based on natural philosophy. In the first century, some understood Moses as allegory. Philo wasn't unique. Josephus wrote:

For all things have here a reference to the nature of the universe: while our legislator speaks some things wisely, but enigmatically; and others under a decent allegory: but still explains such things as required a direct explication plainly and expressly. However, those that have a mind to know the reasons of every thing, may find here a very curious philosophical theory: which I now indeed shall wave the explication of: but if God afford me time for it, I will set about writing it after I have finished the present work.

[One Bad Pig]

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.

What makes you think a modern scientific estimate of the length of a Jewish generation has anything to do with ancient concepts of generation length?

Let's see if this link works. If not, it's from the book "Covenant & Polity in Biblical Israel: Biblical Foundations & Jewish Expressions" by Daniel J. Elazar, in the section "The Biblical Organization of Time".

Source: Daniel Elazar

The oft-used biblical phrase "forty years" is the idiom for a generation, representing the outer limits of a generation's time span. Empirical studies subsequently have shown that the time span involved in a historical generation is between 25 and 40 years, as the Bible itself frequently suggests.....
A person's "generation" refers to the generation of his maturity. A normal lifetime, according to the Bible, is essentially two generations in length and a full three generations (120 years) is the Bible's upper limit.

© Copyright Original Source

[Darfius]

God is in the millennial temple in Eze 43. read it closely.

43:4 And the glory of the Lord came into the house by the way of the gate whose prospect is toward the east.
5 So the spirit took me up, and brought me into the inner court; and, behold, the glory of the Lord filled the house.
6 And I heard him speaking unto me out of the house; and the man stood by me.
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.

I believe a structure will be on Mt. Zion, but what does it matter if it is the same structure? The prophecy is fulfilled so long as there is a structure and He dwells there.

The saints and martyrs, while not considered inerrant, based their beliefs on the teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Not all of Jesus' teachings are in the Bible (John 21:25). The Bible is simply tradition written down. The Ethiopian eunuch needed apostolic teaching (Acts 8). He couldn't understand the OT without apostolic instruction. We shouldn't try that either. Our understanding should be based on Jesus and the apostles (Eph 2:21). The Jews didn't know who Jesus was. The Sanhedrin didn't say anything about Messiah, because he didn't know Messiah would suffer.

Luke 19:44
And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

2 Cor 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.

4Q372 [Dead Sea scrolls](c. 200 BCE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_ben_Joseph

Before the written tradition of scripture (special revelation) there was the general revelation of God in nature. (Rom1:20, Psa 19:1)
Allegory has rules. Philo of Alexandria says the rules of allegory are based on natural philosophy. In the first century, some understood Moses as allegory. Philo wasn't unique. Josephus wrote:

Scripture Verse: 1 Corinthians

20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

© Copyright Original Source

Define "spiritually". Whose "spiritual" interpretation should we take as authoritative and on what objective basis? What's the difference between claiming a "spiritual" interpretation independent of the bounds of the text and claiming revelation from a dream?

Scripture Verse: Jeremiah 23

prophesy the delusions of their own mindslead my people astray with their reckless lies

© Copyright Original Source

What about plain old reading comprehension? Some people are stupid. Most are stupid because their own wickedness blinds their vision. "If thine eye be single." There's no need to substitute some imaginary "spiritual" interpretation that goes beyond the bounds of the text--that is, beyond God's very words. He can get His point across without our "help".

[eschaton]

I believe a structure will be on Mt. Zion, but what does it matter if it is the same structure? The prophecy is fulfilled so long as there is a structure and He dwells there.

4Q372 [Dead Sea scrolls](c. 200 BCE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_ben_Joseph

Scripture Verse: 1 Corinthians

20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

© Copyright Original Source

Define "spiritually". Whose "spiritual" interpretation should we take as authoritative and on what objective basis? What's the difference between claiming a "spiritual" interpretation independent of the bounds of the text and claiming revelation from a dream?

Scripture Verse: Jeremiah 23

prophesy the delusions of their own mindslead my people astray with their reckless lies

© Copyright Original Source

What about plain old reading comprehension? Some people are stupid. Most are stupid because their own wickedness blinds their vision. "If thine eye be single." There's no need to substitute some imaginary "spiritual" interpretation that goes beyond the bounds of the text--that is, beyond God's very words. He can get His point across without our "help".

My point is that He was standing in the millennial temple. If He was standing in a spot forever, and the whole heaven and earth flee away, does God flee away too? If there is a new heaven and earth is there a new God too. I'm saying it makes no sense.

I don't believe the Sanhedrin was an Essene.

1 Cor 2:8 None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

1 Cor 1:20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Spiritually means allegorically based on the philosophical wisdom of God. That is an ethical way of life. The answer to your question is general revelation, God revealing Himself in nature (Rom 1:20). Philo names his predecessors in the view as well as his contemporaries. He is talking about the Theraputes, Josephus, and the like. Not all Jews shared the same spiritual view. Jesus shows it in His parables like the one I gave earlier. Paul explains it in the spirit and law. Paul shares quite a bit with Philo.


What you say about some people is true. That's the reason the scriptures say:

1 John 4
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. ...

I made a post about that in the other thread.

[Darfius]

My point is that He was standing in the millennial temple. If He was standing in a spot forever, and the whole heaven and earth flee away, does God flee away too? If there is a new heaven and earth is there a new God too. I'm saying it makes no sense.

If heaven and earth are renewed to their pre-fall conditions, that would mean the old heaven and earth had "fled away." Meanwhile God's in the same spot like a bawss.

I don't believe the Sanhedrin was an Essene.

I believe the Sanhedrin were educated scholars familiar with Essene doctrine. I also believe the Essenes, if indeed they were responsible for the Dead Sea scrolls, preserved documents reflecting widespread Jewish beliefs of the Second Temple period.

1 Cor 2:8 None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Paul was clearly referring primarily to the devil, who believed he was defeating Jesus by killing Him.

1 Cor 1:20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

A stumbling block because being crucified was the opposite of a sign which bestowed glory. Crucifixion bestowed humiliation. To the proud and warlike Jews, following a crucified Messiah would have required them to overcome a lot of that pride. Most were not willing. To the Greeks, the idea of God dying was absurd. Also, Jesus said we must become like children and the Greeks prided themselves on being "wiser" than everyone else. In both cases, pride was a (usually) insurmountable obstacle.

Similarly, your pride at having found the super-secret-decoder-ring to the Scriptures prevents you from grasping the meaning of the plain text.

Spiritually means allegorically based on the philosophical wisdom of God. That is an ethical way of life. The answer to your question is general revelation, God revealing Himself in nature (Rom 1:20). Philo names his predecessors in the view as well as his contemporaries. He is talking about the Theraputes, Josephus, and the like. Not all Jews shared the same spiritual view. Jesus shows it in His parables like the one I gave earlier. Paul explains it in the spirit and law. Paul shares quite a bit with Philo.

"Nature" sure as heck doesn't include Justin Martyr. I am aware the writers of the New Testament employed Philonic Logos imagery to describe Jesus and were obviously familiar with his writing, but just as obviously they did not agree with him on certain things, namely and most importantly that Jesus was the Christ. Ironically, the man you are holding up as a paragon of "spiritual interpretation" missed the boat on the whole Jesus is the Messiah thing.

I made a post about that in the other thread.

Would you please cite it here? I don't intend to go hunting for it.

[eschaton]

If heaven and earth are renewed to their pre-fall conditions, that would mean the old heaven and earth had "fled away." Meanwhile God's in the same spot like a bawss.



I believe the Sanhedrin were educated scholars familiar with Essene doctrine. I also believe the Essenes, if indeed they were responsible for the Dead Sea scrolls, preserved documents reflecting widespread Jewish beliefs of the Second Temple period.



Paul was clearly referring primarily to the devil, who believed he was defeating Jesus by killing Him.



A stumbling block because being crucified was the opposite of a sign which bestowed glory. Crucifixion bestowed humiliation. To the proud and warlike Jews, following a crucified Messiah would have required them to overcome a lot of that pride. Most were not willing. To the Greeks, the idea of God dying was absurd. Also, Jesus said we must become like children and the Greeks prided themselves on being "wiser" than everyone else. In both cases, pride was a (usually) insurmountable obstacle.

Similarly, your pride at having found the super-secret-decoder-ring to the Scriptures prevents you from grasping the meaning of the plain text.



"Nature" sure as heck doesn't include Justin Martyr. I am aware the writers of the New Testament employed Philonic Logos imagery to describe Jesus and were obviously familiar with his writing, but just as obviously they did not agree with him on certain things, namely and most importantly that Jesus was the Christ. Ironically, the man you are holding up as a paragon of "spiritual interpretation" missed the boat on the whole Jesus is the Messiah thing.



Would you please cite it here? I don't intend to go hunting for it.

You're supposed to be the literalist, not me. Heaven and earth fleeing away don't sound like returning to a garden like condition. That's why the literalism that the pre-mill is founded on doesn't make any sense to me. It sounds more subjective than allegory founded on philosophical principles. You show your subjectivity by making declarations about what the scriptures mean without any resort to the literalism you claim. I'm talking about what the Sanhedrin knew or not, and Paul really meant this and that. It sounds more subjective than Dee Dee Warren's Olivet commentary. I see more eisegesis than exegesis from a self-proclaimed literalist. I see no plain text understanding in what you say. Pre-mills have set themselves up as masters over scripture to declare that it means whatever they say it means. That's the reason there have been so many false date-setting and prophecies over the last few hundred years. Philo says men with such an attitude were as evil as those before the flood.

The nature I am talking about is the old and the new man that Paul is talking about. Its the difference between materialism and spirituality.

[Darfius]

You're supposed to be the literalist, not me. Heaven and earth fleeing away don't sound like returning to a garden like condition. That's why the literalism that the pre-mill is founded on doesn't make any sense to me. It sounds more subjective than allegory founded on philosophical principles. You show your subjectivity by making declarations about what the scriptures mean without any resort to the literalism you claim. I'm talking about what the Sanhedrin knew or not, and Paul really meant this and that. It sounds more subjective than Dee Dee Warren's Olivet commentary. I see more eisegesis than exegesis from a self-proclaimed literalist. I see no plain text understanding in what you say. Pre-mills have set themselves up as masters over scripture to declare that it means whatever they say it means. That's the reason there have been so many false date-setting and prophecies over the last few hundred years. Philo says men with such an attitude were as evil as those before the flood.

I've never claimed to be a "literalist", only a "plain textualist". Rather than say exactly how the death and corruption which has infected this world would be cleansed, God said "flee away". I understand you're upset over the ease with which I bat aside your Gnosticism under the guise of "spirituality", but only valid arguments concern me and this isn't one.

And "what the Sanhedrin knew or not" and "whether Paul really meant this or that" is called context. That matters to those of us who want to know what God meant and don't merely wish to assign our own meaning to the text.

The fact that you still cite Philo as authoritative when he rejected Jesus Christ says all that needs to be said about you.

The nature I am talking about is the old and the new man that Paul is talking about. Its the difference between materialism and spirituality.

This is as Gnostic as it gets. God made matter and called it "very good". Refute that, if you dare. The nature God talks about is the difference between sin and life.

[eschaton]

old man

I've never claimed to be a "literalist", only a "plain textualist". Rather than say exactly how the death and corruption which has infected this world would be cleansed, God said "flee away". I understand you're upset over the ease with which I bat aside your Gnosticism under the guise of "spirituality", but only valid arguments concern me and this isn't one.

And "what the Sanhedrin knew or not" and "whether Paul really meant this or that" is called context. That matters to those of us who want to know what God meant and don't merely wish to assign our own meaning to the text.

The fact that you still cite Philo as authoritative when he rejected Jesus Christ says all that needs to be said about you.



This is as Gnostic as it gets. God made matter and called it "very good". Refute that, if you dare. The nature God talks about is the difference between sin and life.

Premillienialism is founded on literalism. That's what you call plain textualism. When I Google plain textualist I get info about the constitution and legal terms. I didn't get anything about the Bible, although if I go 20 pages deep maybe I would find something. Plain textualist seems to be something you pull off the top of your head like the Bible interpretations you give. Every point I've made I'ved proved from scripture and then given extra-biblical sources as well. What you call context I've given scripture to refute, such as 1 Cor 2:8.

You're lack of knowledge is overwhelming. The Jews didn't preserve Philo's writings. The Christian church did. There is historical testimony that Philo became a Christian, although many scholars doubt that he ever heard of Jesus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo

2 Corinthians 4:18
While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

God created the seen and the unseen, the heaven and the earth and called it good. The spiritual man looks for those things that are not seen. The old plain textualist looks at things temporal. The old man is under the Law.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

[Rushing Jaws]

Sounds legit to me, sean, how about you? "I'm not sure what the truth is on this, but I'm sure someone more concerned with the truth than me has covered it." *handwave flourish at the end*



"I know Revelation is highly symbolic because I know it is. Besides, if we take it literally, that would make John a crazy religious freak and us for believing him. Sure, I love Christ. Whatever."



"I don't believe what I believe because I hunger and thirst for righteousness. I follow the traditions of my fathers. I believe what I believe because when I spent what little time I have spent looking into the most important matters in this world or the next through half-opened eyes, meh, good enough. Ttyl, it's hard to change my toddler's diaper, hold my phone and defend the claims I somehow had time to make in the previous posts before this one."

To that extent

[Darfius]

To that extent

You had to read between the lines to understand that "OP" said my caricature. I know reading between the lines is difficult for you preterists. Your eyes fall off the page to a blackboard nearby where you start scribbling weird stuff and patting yourselves on the back.

I agree with everything else you said. Do you agree that when John said "the whole world" would worship the beast, he meant the whole world? Or even the whole Roman empire? Haha. Lecturing me when you don't have a friggin clue.

[eschaton]

To that extent, the human authors of Scripture are no different from any other human author - complications arise when one tries to discover what God, the Primary Author of all Scripture, meant.

I think the idea that the literal sense has something to do with author intent was brought in by some of the Reformers who disliked traditional allegorical interpretation. It is part of some modern theological theories. It implies that the author couldn't use a metaphor to express himself. Or else any metaphor the author uses has to be considered literal. If metaphor is literal, then all writing is literal and there really isn't such a thing as a metaphor. Some of the later Reformers said that symbolic writing was "double literal."

If we have to understand metaphor as literal because that is what the author intended, then Nicodemus was right about re-entering his mother's womb (John 3:4). I prefer the biblical explanation that wisdom is expressed in parable and simile.

Proverbs 1:5-7 (ESV)
5 Let the wise hear and increase in learning,
and the one who understands obtain guidance,
6 to understand a proverb and a saying,
the words of the wise and their riddles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allego...n_of_the_Bible