Timing? Looking for a preterist response.

[Jaltus]

DDW and other preterists generally claim they are the only ones who make sense of the timing passages throughout the NT. My question, then, is what do you guys do with Revelation 17:8?

Revelation 17:8 8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to rise from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come.

This seems to me to not fit with ANY kind of Postmill/amill brand of preterism.

Mind you, I am looking for a quickie answer and not a hardcore debate since I will be out of town.

- Jaltus

[Dee Dee Warren]

Quickie answer. Not sure what your issue is. The "beast" there isn't satan. It is the Roman Empire.

[studyhound]

Quickie answer, either that or the Caesars more specifically (That the beast was, and is not, and shall be present. ), the anti-type of Christ (Who was and is and is to come).


That or Hilliary Clinton :tongue:



:studyhound:

[Dee Dee Warren]

I still don't see Jaltus' issue. I think I see what he thinks it is which would defeat his own point.

[Ted]

Jaltus,

The answer isn’t a real “quickie, but it shouldn’t take long.

The first task is to identify the beast. The imagery comes from Daniel 7, and is a composite of all four beasts in that prophecy. Thus, this beast should be a composite of their meanings. The four beasts were successive human governments, beginning with Babylon. Thus, the beast is a composite of all human government since Babylon, including Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome.

Next, we must find a time when there is no human government. After all, if the beast represents human governments, and the beast “is not,” then we are looking for a time when there is no human government.

Matt 24:36-42 speaks of the time of Jesus’ return. He specifically says that that time will be like the time of Noah, in which all the wicked were killed, and the righteous (all 8!) were saved on the ark. Peter (2 Pet 3:5-10) makes another parallel between the flood and the Day of the Lord. Just as the physical earth was destroyed by a physical flood, killing the wicked, the physical earth will be destroyed by physical fire at the Day of the Lord, killing the wicked. This leaves all the saints in heaven (John 14:1-3), and the wicked dead on earth.

Revelation 20 identifies this time as the millennium, in which Satan is chained in the desolate earth (abussos cf. Jer 4:23) unable to tempt anyone because there is no one there to tempt! The saints were all raised in the first resurrection at the parousia (1 Thess 4:13-17), and have 1,000 years to perform a task of judgment (Rev 20:4).

Because there is no one alive on the earth, there is no human government. Thus, the beast “is not.”

There is no need to take scripture out of its simple sense, remembering the sources of the imagery. And there is no need to spiritualize the millennium into 40 years. God says 1,000 years, using plain language. We ought to believe him.

Ted

[kendemyer]

Dear Ted,

Thank you for your exposition. I think your writing reflects that you seem to have done the most research on this issue. Have some pearls.

Sincerely,

Ken

[Dee Dee Warren]

More :grave:

[Ted]

Ken,

Thank you. But I'm not sure that my comment was all that profound. I've lost track of the number of "DUH!" moments in my scriptural studies. That is one of those places. If the imagery comes from a particular place, shouldn't I look there for understanding? DUH! And if I'm going to argue a point, isn't that the best place to start? DUH!

The fact that Revelation is an assembly of all the major OT prophecies should tip me that direction, too.

DeeDee,

What was that smilie?

Ted

[Dee Dee Warren]

Ted I think it is one of my custom smilies - it means that Ken is trolling through old threads and digging them up. It means thread gravedigging. In other words, from the way I see it, he was looking for a shallow way to compliment folks, and in that way the compliment is cheapened since Ken obviously doing this for a purpose. It really is not too much different than forum flooding which is against the rules.

Though your work does deserve compliments as I have given it often.

[kendemyer]

Dee Dee,

In a very short time, I have seen two people looking at these revisited threads. I think your rude allegation regarding these revistited threads is unfounded.

Sincerely,

Ken

[Dee Dee Warren]

Ken, we recently made a rule against forum flooding. You are doing the same thing in a different way. While you might think my comments rude, I think what you are doing is reportable. I am attempting to solve it person to person without getting leadership involved as a member since I do not moderate you in eschatology being too much your opponent for it to be unbiased without the supervision of others.

It isn't a matter of whether or not poeple will read them. That is not what makes it inappropriate behaviour.