Question for Preterists about the second coming of Christ

[Jude3b]

I have just recently been slightly introduced to Preterism. It is confusing me. It seems that Preterists teach that all scripture has been fulfilled concerning the second coming of Christ. Is that true?
Sincerely, Jude 3b

[dizzle]

Only a heretical group that goes by the name of "preterism" teaches that. The majority of preterists here on this forum are fully orthodox and would denounce such teaching. For more information you can see my article at www.tektonics.org/hythere.html

[kofh2u]

I have just recently been slightly introduced to Preterism. It is confusing me. It seems that Preterists teach that all scripture has been fulfilled concerning the second coming of Christ. Is that true?
Sincerely, Jude 3b

Even tho' we are in a rather liberal era of Christian domainance in Wester Culture, the 1000 years of Roman Catholicism long over and the many centuries of a "falling away" from theocratic rule, I am STILL hesitant to explain this radical view.
Nevertheless, this is one heretical opinion?
1) Using certain key ideas, we can choose among any number of hypothesis that occur to us, including those doctrines, ancient and more recent.

2) Applying our "guesses" to the information or clues found in scripture, we can hope to connect the symbolism with the known facts of history. As in the Scientific Method, if our hypothesis seems, one step at a time, supported by both the facts and the symbolism, we may continue to apply our rationale further. Otherwise, we discard it. This is philosophically an empiricism also supported by Oscam's Razor.

3)Now, with this in mind, the one symbolic statement that stands out as a possible foundation for truth and the one historical fact is:

a)... that upon the second coming, Christ will rule for 1000 years.

b) ... Western Culture was mysteriously closed off commerce, internal war, secular academics, written histories, and any form of religion other than Christ. Hence, for 1000 years the Dark Ages reigned over our culture with a prohibition against any heresay former Paganism or Mythological Godheads.

4) With this hypothesis in hand, we can return to scriptue and see if it test positive in one short experiment of applying it to the "puzzle."


EXPERIMENT ONE:

[Rev. 1:1 The insight explained by Jesus Christ, which contemplative thinking revealed unto him, to show unto his students things which must shortly come to pass; and he explains the insight and substanciates it by appealing to the psychic facility of Conscience within his advocate John:

Rev. 1:2 Who knew of certain "keys" to the Old Testament's literary organization, and of the explanation by Jesus, about our Conscience, and concerning the Human Psyche, and of all things that he had come to understand.

Rev. 1:3 Rewarded will be he that perceives the intent of these ancient symbolic expressions written here in Revelation, and they that comprehend the subtle meanings of this prediction, and who can relate to those things which are written therein: for the 21st Century is at hand.

Rev. 1:4 John to the seven present, and yet to be developed, stages of Christianity, which are in our Western Culture: Grace be unto you, and peace from the Mind, which was Unconscious, and is Sub-conscious, and is evolving into total Consciousness; and from the seven psychic apparati which are before the Mind;

Rev. 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is our example of archetypical
Conscience, and who is the sole model of Conscientious Behavior, and the first to awaken from the Unconscious Mind into a conscious awareness of this psychic facility, and the role model for the leaders of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and roused us from our apathy and complicity by means of his own physical murder,

Rev. 1:6 And hath made us teachers and leaders concerned with Realty and the Universe and clear, sane, accurate thinking; to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

Rev. 1:7 Behold, he cometh within the very thoughts of our own minds; and every psychic faculty of human mind shall see Conscience emerge, and they also, the libidinal beast within us, which pierced him: and all those presently subconscious people of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Rev. 1:8 I am the Macrocosms and Microcosms, the Universe and the Mind, saith the Modern Homouiousian brain, whose Unconscious Psyche, and whose Subconscious Psyche, and whose Conscious Psyche is to come, the Totally Conscious Mind.

Rev. 1:9 I John, who also am your brother and companion during these years of opposition to development of social sanity, and in the understanding and study of Human Behavior, and the promulgation of truth about the Mind, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the purpose of interpreting the scripture of Torah, and for propogation of those
explanations concerning it by Jesus.

Rev. 1:10 I was in meditation on Saturday, and experienced a psychic episode, as if a trumpet blast,

Rev. 1:11 A voice in my head saying, I am the Macrocosms and
Microcosms, the Universe and the Mind,: and, what thou understandest, write as a final book to the New Testament, and send it unto each of the present seven fledgeling churches which shall grow as one, experiencing seven stages of christianity which shall be in this Western Culture; unto (1) the Time of the Apostles, and unto (2) the Terror of Nero, and unto (3) the Early Papacy, and unto (4) Universal Roman Catholicism, and unto (5) The Reformed Catholic Church, and unto (6) Protestantism, and unto (7) Humanistic Christianity.

Rev. 1:12 And I ponder on these thoughts. And so reflecting, I
envisioned these seven stages of development to come;

Rev. 1:13 And in the midst of my envisioning of these seven social
stages of development, one like unto my own psychic Conscience, but ancient and long veiled in my own unconsciousness, and embracing my whole psyche,

Rev. 1:14 This psychic Homoiousian manifestation as ageless as man himself, pure in the long solitude of genetic memories of our whole collective humanity, ancient and long recording of all human behavior; was now ready and prepared to reveal itself and to shock us from our psychic unawareness;

Rev. 1:15 This conscious psychic apparatus has been moulded as a
resouvier of human observation, and was developed in the furnace of Evolution; and our behavior over many millennia it has remembered.

Rev. 1:16 And, I, John, remember that Jesus utilized the digits of his right hand in the manner of the Kohanim priests of Moses' day to count out the seven names: and he synergized all secular knowledge with the scriptural authority of a "hidden manna," a mental software program: and in the framework of what is revealed there is undeniablity.

Rev. 1:17 And when I became aware of this psychic entity within
myself, my life, my previous state of mind, was meaningless. And, my Conscience expanded and fulled my whole psyche, reminding me: I am the Universe and the Mind.

Rev. 1:18 I, the Conscience, am conscious, and though I was long
unconscious; behold, I am humanly conscious for evermore, Amen; and I have the keys to the matter of life beyond our personal experience and the meaning of insanity.

Rev. 1:19 Write about unconscious human behaviors in your own day, and the psychic forces present in society now, that determine behaviors, and the predictable effects in the sociology of Western history to come;

Rev. 1:20 Here, in Revelation, is the meaning of the seven psychic
archetypes which thou sawest "cued" on my hand, and the seven social stages of institutionalized Christian development. The seven psychic archetypes symbolize the seven mentalities (paradigms) of Christian maturation: the seven different sociological and developmental periods of Christianity are (1) the Time of the Apostles, (2) the Terror of Nero, (3) the Early Papacy (313 AD), (4) Universal Roman Catholicism, (5) The Reformed Catholic Church, (6) Protestantism, and (7) Humanistic Christianity.

Now having taken this excerpt from Revelation as found in the Freudian Bible it may be useful to add a few verses from Genesis too, since most assuredly, whereas the 1000 years of christianity are clearly accounted for, much else mentioned, necessarily, needs support in order to assure comprehension:

Gen. 1:26 And The Universal Force, the macrocosmos, said, Let the
Natural Laws make man's mind, a microcosmos, in our image, after our
orderly organization: and let them have dominion over the fish of the
sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Gen. 1:27 So The Universal Force created an abstract mind in his own
image, enabled to image The Universal Force, abstractly and
mathematically, so created The Universal Force him; male and female created he them.

Gen. 1:28 And The Universal Force blessed them, and The Universal
Force said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and apply the spirit of Natural Law over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Even tho' we are in a rather liberal era of Christian domainance in Wester Culture, the 1000 years of Roman Catholicism long over and the many centuries of a "falling away" from theocratic rule, I am STILL hesitant to explain this radical view.
Nevertheless, this is one heretical opinion?
1) Using certain key ideas, we can choose among any number of hypothesis that occur to us, including those doctrines, ancient and more recent.

2) Applying our "guesses" to the information or clues found in scripture, we can hope to connect the symbolism with the known facts of history. As in the Scientific Method, if our hypothesis seems, one step at a time, supported by both the facts and the symbolism, we may continue to apply our rationale further. Otherwise, we discard it. This is philosophically an empiricism also supported by Oscam's Razor.

3)Now, with this in mind, the one symbolic statement that stands out as a possible foundation for truth and the one historical fact is:

a)... that upon the second coming, Christ will rule for 1000 years.

b) ... Western Culture was mysteriously closed off commerce, internal war, secular academics, written histories, and any form of religion other than Christ. Hence, for 1000 years the Dark Ages reigned over our culture with a prohibition against any heresay former Paganism or Mythological Godheads.

4) With this hypothesis in hand, we can return to scriptue and see if it test positive in one short experiment of applying it to the "puzzle."


EXPERIMENT ONE:

[Rev. 1:1 The insight explained by Jesus Christ, which contemplative thinking revealed unto him, to show unto his students things which must shortly come to pass; and he explains the insight and substanciates it by appealing to the psychic facility of Conscience within his advocate John:

Rev. 1:2 Who knew of certain "keys" to the Old Testament's literary organization, and of the explanation by Jesus, about our Conscience, and concerning the Human Psyche, and of all things that he had come to understand.

Rev. 1:3 Rewarded will be he that perceives the intent of these ancient symbolic expressions written here in Revelation, and they that comprehend the subtle meanings of this prediction, and who can relate to those things which are written therein: for the 21st Century is at hand.

Rev. 1:4 John to the seven present, and yet to be developed, stages of Christianity, which are in our Western Culture: Grace be unto you, and peace from the Mind, which was Unconscious, and is Sub-conscious, and is evolving into total Consciousness; and from the seven psychic apparati which are before the Mind;

Rev. 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is our example of archetypical
Conscience, and who is the sole model of Conscientious Behavior, and the first to awaken from the Unconscious Mind into a conscious awareness of this psychic facility, and the role model for the leaders of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and roused us from our apathy and complicity by means of his own physical murder,

Rev. 1:6 And hath made us teachers and leaders concerned with Realty and the Universe and clear, sane, accurate thinking; to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.

Rev. 1:7 Behold, he cometh within the very thoughts of our own minds; and every psychic faculty of human mind shall see Conscience emerge, and they also, the libidinal beast within us, which pierced him: and all those presently subconscious people of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Rev. 1:8 I am the Macrocosms and Microcosms, the Universe and the Mind, saith the Modern Homouiousian brain, whose Unconscious Psyche, and whose Subconscious Psyche, and whose Conscious Psyche is to come, the Totally Conscious Mind.

Rev. 1:9 I John, who also am your brother and companion during these years of opposition to development of social sanity, and in the understanding and study of Human Behavior, and the promulgation of truth about the Mind, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the purpose of interpreting the scripture of Torah, and for propogation of those
explanations concerning it by Jesus.

Rev. 1:10 I was in meditation on Saturday, and experienced a psychic episode, as if a trumpet blast,

Rev. 1:11 A voice in my head saying, I am the Macrocosms and
Microcosms, the Universe and the Mind,: and, what thou understandest, write as a final book to the New Testament, and send it unto each of the present seven fledgeling churches which shall grow as one, experiencing seven stages of christianity which shall be in this Western Culture; unto (1) the Time of the Apostles, and unto (2) the Terror of Nero, and unto (3) the Early Papacy, and unto (4) Universal Roman Catholicism, and unto (5) The Reformed Catholic Church, and unto (6) Protestantism, and unto (7) Humanistic Christianity.

Rev. 1:12 And I ponder on these thoughts. And so reflecting, I
envisioned these seven stages of development to come;

Rev. 1:13 And in the midst of my envisioning of these seven social
stages of development, one like unto my own psychic Conscience, but ancient and long veiled in my own unconsciousness, and embracing my whole psyche,

Rev. 1:14 This psychic Homoiousian manifestation as ageless as man himself, pure in the long solitude of genetic memories of our whole collective humanity, ancient and long recording of all human behavior; was now ready and prepared to reveal itself and to shock us from our psychic unawareness;

Rev. 1:15 This conscious psychic apparatus has been moulded as a
resouvier of human observation, and was developed in the furnace of Evolution; and our behavior over many millennia it has remembered.

Rev. 1:16 And, I, John, remember that Jesus utilized the digits of his right hand in the manner of the Kohanim priests of Moses' day to count out the seven names: and he synergized all secular knowledge with the scriptural authority of a "hidden manna," a mental software program: and in the framework of what is revealed there is undeniablity.

Rev. 1:17 And when I became aware of this psychic entity within
myself, my life, my previous state of mind, was meaningless. And, my Conscience expanded and fulled my whole psyche, reminding me: I am the Universe and the Mind.

Rev. 1:18 I, the Conscience, am conscious, and though I was long
unconscious; behold, I am humanly conscious for evermore, Amen; and I have the keys to the matter of life beyond our personal experience and the meaning of insanity.

Rev. 1:19 Write about unconscious human behaviors in your own day, and the psychic forces present in society now, that determine behaviors, and the predictable effects in the sociology of Western history to come;

Rev. 1:20 Here, in Revelation, is the meaning of the seven psychic
archetypes which thou sawest "cued" on my hand, and the seven social stages of institutionalized Christian development. The seven psychic archetypes symbolize the seven mentalities (paradigms) of Christian maturation: the seven different sociological and developmental periods of Christianity are (1) the Time of the Apostles, (2) the Terror of Nero, (3) the Early Papacy (313 AD), (4) Universal Roman Catholicism, (5) The Reformed Catholic Church, (6) Protestantism, and (7) Humanistic Christianity.

Now having taken this excerpt from Revelation as found in the Freudian Bible it may be useful to add a few verses from Genesis too, since most assuredly, whereas the 1000 years of christianity are clearly accounted for, much else mentioned, necessarily, needs support in order to assure comprehension:

Gen. 1:26 And The Universal Force, the macrocosmos, said, Let the
Natural Laws make man's mind, a microcosmos, in our image, after our
orderly organization: and let them have dominion over the fish of the
sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Gen. 1:27 So The Universal Force created an abstract mind in his own
image, enabled to image The Universal Force, abstractly and
mathematically, so created The Universal Force him; male and female created he them.

Gen. 1:28 And The Universal Force blessed them, and The Universal
Force said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and apply the spirit of Natural Law over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
:huh:?

I'm not sure what you are getting at kofh2u. Is this a position you are a proponent of? Are you comparing this to preterism? What exactly is your opinion of preterism?

What is your eschatology?

I would love to respond to your post, but I am not quite sure how to respond. Anything you can do to clarify would be most helpful.

Thanks,

Faramir the befuddled.

[Jude3b]

Dear Dee Dee: Thank you for the article you referred me to. Interesting. Please tell me what does a "Fully Orthodox Preterist" believe? Is there a brief doctrinal statement for "fully orthodox preterists?" What church groups might someone find "fully orthodox preterists" in?
Thank you, Jude 3b

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

DDW Said:

Only a heretical group that goes by the name of "preterism" teaches that. The majority of preterists here on this forum are fully orthodox and would denounce such teaching. For more information you can see my article at www.tektonics.org/hythere.html (http://www.tektonics.org/hythere.html)

To which Jude3b replied:

Dear Dee Dee: Thank you for the article you referred me to. Interesting. Please tell me what does a "Fully Orthodox Preterist" believe? Is there a brief doctrinal statement for "fully orthodox preterists?" What church groups might someone find "fully orthodox preterists" in?
Thank you, Jude 3bJust for clarification purposes (because I was confused with Jude3b's question until I re read Dee Dee's post).

There are preterist, like myself and Dee Dee, who hold to an orthodox view of eschatology, which include a future, physical return of Christ and a future final judgement. So, I beleive what Dee Dee meant by that is that true preterist have the same eschatological beliefs that are espoused by all orthodox (small o) Christians. We prefer the term preterist, but will use the term 'orthodox preterist' to differentiate ourselves from those who call themselves full preterist (but we, and by we I mean Dee Dee) prefer the term Neohymenaenism.

To my knowledge there is no group that goes by the name "fully orthodox preterist". Which is a good thing, because with "orthodox preterist" and "full preterist" "fully orthodox preterist" would be very confusing indeed. :wink:

But I digress.

To answer your question Jude3b (at least what I assume your question is). Orthodox preterist believe that most of the propecies in the Bible have been fullfilled, including the "great tribulation" which we believe was culminated with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. We believe that the Physical second coming, the physical resurection of the dead and the final judgement are still future events. It is that last that diferentiates orthodox preterist from neohymenaenist. (and neohymenaenist from all of orthodx Christianity)

I hope this was helpful.

[kofh2u]

:huh:?

I'm not sure what you are getting at kofh2u. Is this a position you are a proponent of? Are you comparing this to preterism? What exactly is your opinion of preterism?

What is your eschatology?

I would love to respond to your post, but I am not quite sure how to respond. Anything you can do to clarify would be most helpful.

Thanks,

Faramir the befuddled.


Faramir... you are not befuddled, it is I, for sure.

Reading my way tooooo long post it is obvious no one could get my point.

1) I am not sure what a Preterist says.
2) I meant that in surmising the validity of assumptions made concerning the second coming, we know of at least one specific fact stated in Revelation. We know that is comes after a failed 1000 year reign, accompanied by a reemergence of short-lived reigns in the secular world, to include a symbolized re-instatement of the "beast" ( the one that was wounded to death) previous to that 1000 years.
Satan will be unchained also, having been so confined during the 1000 years.
3) The Dark Ages are well documented as a 1000 year period. We know little else about the historical 1000 year period, a time of Christian Monasticism, except that all references to other gods and pagan deities stopped. Only one name ruled in heaven, as far as the historical Dark Age period is concerned.

4) With this one symbolized prophecy and the above historical record of THE only 1000 year reign of anything or anybody ever (in Western Culture) my point is:

We are now awaiying the final victory of a returning Christ. Satan is and has been loose, demonstrated by his presence everywhere today, even identified as The Geat Satan behind our western culture.

5) The time line described in the Freudian Bible Translation then concurs with what I believe.

Rev. 1:11 A voice in my head saying, I am the Macrocosms and
Microcosms, the Universe and the Mind,: and, what thou understandest, write as a final book to the New Testament, and send it unto each of the present seven fledgeling churches which shall grow as one, experiencing seven stages of christianity which shall be in this Western Culture; unto (1) the Time of the Apostles, and unto (2) the Terror of Nero, and unto (3) the Early Papacy, and unto (4) Universal Roman Catholicism, and unto (5) The Reformed Catholic Church, and unto (6) Protestantism, and unto (7) Humanistic Christianity.

Rev. 1:20 Here, in Revelation, is the meaning of the seven psychic
archetypes which thou sawest "cued" on my hand, and the seven social stages of institutionalized Christian development. The seven psychic archetypes symbolize the seven mentalities (paradigms) of Christian maturation: the seven different sociological and developmental periods of Christianity are (1) the Time of the Apostles, (2) the Terror of Nero, (3) the Early Papacy (313 AD), (4) Universal Roman Catholicism, (5) The Reformed Catholic Church, (6) Protestantism, and (7) Humanistic Christianity.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Thanks for the response Jubeb3. Interesting. I would like to discuss further (I would especially like to explain preterism to you :grin:). Right now, I don't have the time, but I hope to respond in length. I have to admit that I have more questions than comments, but at least, now they can be informed questions. Thanks for the clarification.

[Jude3b]

Fraramir, So what doctrinal difference is there between the "orthodox preterist" and the amillennialist?

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Only have time for a quick answer. So here goes.

"Orthodox Preterist" can be amillinial, but do not have to be. For, example, I am a postmelinnialist. What makes us orthodox is the fact that we believe in a physical second coming and a final judgement.

I guess the main difference between amil and postmil orthodox preterist is that postmil believe that the millininum is now and a literal period of time on earth. (We do not believe that the thousand years is a literal thousand years obviously but that thousand is typically used for a very large number in ANE literature). While amils believe that the millinium itself if figurative.

I hope that helps. And I hope it wasn't too broad. Didn't have time for much detail

[Jude3b]

For Postmills- "Postmills believe the millenium is now and literal." Are you saying that we are in the millenioum NOW?? How long is the millenium if it is now and when did it start and when will it end??

For Amils- Doesn't the Amil camp believe that the millenium is taking place right now in heaven?

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

For Postmills- "Postmills believe the millenium is now and literal." Are you saying that we are in the millenioum NOW?? How long is the millenium if it is now and when did it start and when will it end??I can really only speak for myself, but I believe that yes we are in the millennium now(remember I said that postmil preterist believe that the 1000 years is symbolic of a long time, in fact 1000 is used throughout scripture to indicate a nonspecific large quantity), and that it started after the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 and will end when Jesus comes back again physically (when that is I do not know, but probably not for a long time to come). I believe that Jesus will not come back until the world is entirely or almost entirely Christian.

That is a very simplified version of my position. If you want more detail, I could provide it, but you might want to read through the thread "Millinal Positions" for more detailed discussion. http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=691

For Amils- Doesn't the Amil camp believe that the millenium is taking place right now in heaven?
I think that is what Amils believe, but I will let them speak for themselves. :grin:

[Jude3b]

What makes you think that Jesus is not coming back for a long time or until nearly everybody is a Christian? Jesus did ask about his return, "Would He find faith on the earth?"

[Reader]

For Postmills- "Postmills believe the millenium is now and literal." Are you saying that we are in the millenioum NOW?? How long is the millenium if it is now and when did it start and when will it end??

For Amils- Doesn't the Amil camp believe that the millenium is taking place right now in heaven?

Amils do not believe in a literal "thousand years," but we believe that the language of Rev. 20:1-6 is a figurative description of the entire time period between the first coming of Christ and the second coming of Christ;however long that proves to be.

Amils also believe that God has always ruled in heaven and earth; and since Jesus Christ came in the flesh, the Gospel of the Kingdom of God is being preached globally (binding Satan's power to deceive the nations), calling the elect unto the invisible church described in Hebrews 12:22-24, and when the last elect soul in Christ is spiritually saved and gathered in, the end will come and Judgment Day will occur. (II Peter 3)

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

What makes you think that Jesus is not coming back for a long time or until nearly everybody is a Christian? Jesus did ask about his return, "Would He find faith on the earth?" Could you site the quote above for context please?

I think that Jesus physcial return is a long way off because he will wait until He "places every enemy under his feet, the last one being death".

Now it is my turn to site. I do not know, but will find it.

Edit to add
:argh: I can't cut and paste in firefox for some reason. The passage is 1 Cor. 15:25-27 or there abouts. I will try to come back in another browser to post it.

There it is.

25For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27

[dizzle]

What makes you think that Jesus is not coming back for a long time or until nearly everybody is a Christian? Jesus did ask about his return, "Would He find faith on the earth?"
A few questions for you. what makes you think that Jesus is speaking of the Second Coming? and do you deny God's foreknowledge?

[Jude3b]

Dear Dee Dee:

That particular verse about Jesus finding faith when he returns just seems to me to be about the second coming. I have not given a lot of study to this particular subject lately. I am open to opinions and not debating anyone here at this time. Just trying to learn, asking questions.

I certainly do not deny the foreknowlege of God. My goodness He's God! He knows it all!

But, I like reading the responses and getting a better idea of the theologies outh there. Can you give me your opinion as to what churches that we find the orthodox preterists and the amils attending (usually).

Thanks, Jude 3b

[kofh2u]

Amils do not believe in a literal "thousand years," but we believe that the language of Rev. 20:1-6 is a figurative description of the entire time period between the first coming of Christ and the second coming of Christ;however long that proves to be.

Amils also believe that God has always ruled in heaven and earth; and since Jesus Christ came in the flesh, the Gospel of the Kingdom of God is being preached globally (binding Satan's power to deceive the nations), calling the elect unto the invisible church described in Hebrews 12:22-24, and when the last elect soul in Christ is spiritually saved and gathered in, the end will come and Judgment Day will occur. (II Peter 3)


Hi,
Your synopsis of Amil is interesting.

I read what you report about the Amil beliefs. I wonder if you mean that Revelation 20 is pointless or if the Amil have specific meaning for verses 20:1-6?

Since the title of this last book is Revelation, and since elsewhere, it claims that the Spitit of Jesus is prophecy,...

do Amils think we ought look for signs that God, indeed, can tell us the future?

Ought we not take literally the idea that God has the amzing power, one unknown even in our tech age, some way, to tell us what will happen?

I mean, that if the 1000 year reign is merely an allusion to any span of time, then the spirit of prophecy seems more a wishy-washy vague proclamation. Does it not?

Specifically, how do Amils interpret verses 20:1-6?

Is there a web page?

Or, can you report how the strange symbolic statements make the sense of denying the thousand year reign? Or better, what sense is made from 20:1-6?

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Ought we not take literally the idea that God has the amzing power, one unknown even in our tech age, some way, to tell us what will happen?

I mean, that if the 1000 year reign is merely an allusion to any span of time, then the spirit of prophecy seems more a wishy-washy vague proclamation. Does it not?


No it does not!!!!!

Can't really speak for amils, but since we have similar postions in regard to the "literalness" of the 1000 years. I take exception to your statement above.

I believe that the 1000 years means exaclty what it was meant to mean. It's all about context man.

In the ANE the number 1000 was used to refer to a large quantity of a thing (deja vue, haven't I had this conversation before).

To paraphrase Dee Dee (see the space :ddw:?:grin:)

When the bible talks about God owning the catle on 1000 thousand hills, does that mean that the catle on the 1001st hill belongs to someone else? Or that there are exactly 1000 hills with catle on them, no more no less?

Of course not. Then why should we insist that the 1000 year reign to be literally 1000 years?

[Lee1023]

It is interesting to me how the Book of Revelations has begun to be seen as a book about the "End Times" John tells us what the book is about right from the start, it is the Revelation (Unveiling or making known) of Jesus Christ. It was given to his servant John in signs and symbles (symbolic, not literal language). A good example of the symbolic nature is that we know the "lamb" he saw standing on Mount Zion was not a literal lamb but rather "Christ" The Book of Revelations is about Jesus not the "End Times." John wrote the book so he should know.

In referance to the 1000 year reign. A study in Hebrew numbers would be good for the church today. The Hebrew people were big on #s. The following are a few examples:

4 = Earth (4 corners of the earth)
3 = resurrection
2 = Witness
40 = Trial and tribulation (Noah was on the ark 40 days adn nights. The children of God wandered in the wilderness for 40 years)
7 = perfection or completion
6 = man or carnality

The big # in question is 1000. For the Hebrews, the # 1000 reprented eternal establishment. The 1000 year term is symbolic for an eternal reign. Jesus Christ rose from the dead and ushered in the Kingdom of God, and it has no end.

For those who might question the beginning of that kingdom look to Jesus's own testimony for that. He told his disciples that he would not eat or drink with them again unil he had established his Faterh's kingdom. After his resurrection, he ate with them by the sea....that would mean he had established the kingdom or he lied, and HE DOESN'T LIE! also, he told the religious leaders that they would be alive to see His kingdom come in all it's glory, and again HE DOESN'T LIE!

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

It is interesting to me how the Book of Revelations has begun to be seen as a book about the "End Times" John tells us what the book is about right from the start, it is the Revelation (Unveiling or making known) of Jesus Christ. It was given to his servant John in signs and symbles (symbolic, not literal language). A good example of the symbolic nature is that we know the "lamb" he saw standing on Mount Zion was not a literal lamb but rather "Christ" The Book of Revelations is about Jesus not the "End Times." John wrote the book so he should know.

In referance to the 1000 year reign. A study in Hebrew numbers would be good for the church today. The Hebrew people were big on #s. The following are a few examples:

4 = Earth (4 corners of the earth)
3 = resurrection
2 = Witness
40 = Trial and tribulation (Noah was on the ark 40 days adn nights. The children of God wandered in the wilderness for 40 years)
7 = perfection or completion
6 = man or carnality

The big # in question is 1000. For the Hebrews, the # 1000 reprented eternal establishment. The 1000 year term is symbolic for an eternal reign. Jesus Christ rose from the dead and ushered in the Kingdom of God, and it has no end.

For those who might question the beginning of that kingdom look to Jesus's own testimony for that. He told his disciples that he would not eat or drink with them again unil he had established his Faterh's kingdom. After his resurrection, he ate with them by the sea....that would mean he had established the kingdom or he lied, and HE DOESN'T LIE! also, he told the religious leaders that they would be alive to see His kingdom come in all it's glory, and again HE DOESN'T LIE!Good post.

Would you consider yourself a postmill an amill or some other variant. Also, what is you position on the tribulation?

[Daywalker]

I have just recently been slightly introduced to Preterism. It is confusing me. It seems that Preterists teach that all scripture has been fulfilled concerning the second coming of Christ. Is that true?
Sincerely, Jude 3b
Where Preterism AND standard futurism falls short is a mistaken belief that Christ's second Coming was imminent. It wasn't. The kingdom of God was imminent.
In fact, in Rev.1 what was at hand was the events from Rev.1-22. That is why it is said to shortly come to pass in Rev. 1 and 22. It was one long, drawn out chain of events. What would have happened is that God would have eventually organized his saints of Asia in such a way there would be literally 7 churches ONLY in Asia. John, who will be resurrected and go through Daniel's 70 weeks, will one day deliver the letters TO THE 7 churches of Asia. The 7 churches existing as "the 7 churches" "in Asia" were not a fact in John's day...they were prophetic and would have eventually been established.
NOTE: There were, during the days of John, MANY more churches of God in Asia other than the 7. There were SEVERAL churches in Galatia, etc. (Colosse, etc). SO, there was no "7 churches of Asia" at that time...
More could be said...
Honestly, the kingdom of heaven was POSTPONED from manifesting itself on earth.
And if the kingdom of heaven was simply "Christ ruling the world" in the generic Preterist sense, then we have a real problem...because you could never honestly say that it was "at hand" because it always would have been around.
BUT...IF the kingdom of heaven was God's personal, visible rule on earth then the problem is solved. We can just sit back and wait for it, the promises are yet to be fulfilled.
Grace and Peace,
Mike

[dizzle]

Now Mike, you know that orthodox preterists do not believe that the Second Coming was imminent at all. Please represent the belief correctly.

[Daywalker]

Now Mike, you know that orthodox preterists do not believe that the Second Coming was imminent at all. Please represent the belief correctly.
Yes, they do. They take people to Matt. 24 at the Olivet Discourse and say "LOOK, the sign of Christ's coming was the destruction of the temple".
Then they go on to say that Christ "came" in 70 ad when that temple was destroyed. So, yeah...it was accurate. They may not say his BODILY second coming...but they do say second coming. If NOT, then they need to pick their words more carefully...(I am referring to the Partial Prets that I have spoken to on paltalk).

Dee Dee, do you not think that the second coming was accomplished in Ad 70???
ahhh
How DO YOU describe it then???
Grace ,
Mike

[dizzle]

Yes, they do. They take people to Matt. 24 at the Olivet Discourse and say "LOOK, the sign of Christ's coming was the destruction of the temple".

Mike,

Orthodox preterists do in fact believe that Matthew 24 is past. However, they do not believe that Matthew 24 speaks of the Second Coming (at least up to verse 34) - so for you to equate the two is not representing the view fairly. I am not saying you are purposefuly being unfair, maybe you did not know. Now you do.


Then they go on to say that Christ "came" in 70 ad when that temple was destroyed. So, yeah...it was accurate. They may not say his BODILY second coming...but they do say second coming. If NOT, then they need to pick their words more carefully...(I am referring to the Partial Prets that I have spoken to on paltalk).

If any orthodox preterist said that to you, you are correct that they are sloppy and incorrect. I suspect you may be confusing orthodox preterists with heretical preterists, but again, sloppiness is typical on Paltalk so I would not be surprised. But no, speaking as a doctrine, the event known as the "Second Coming" is not believed to have happened in 70AD. Of course, there may certainly be sloppiness in thinking and terminology.



Dee Dee, do you not think that the second coming was accomplished in Ad 70???

No that would be rank heresy if followed through consistently.


ahhh
How DO YOU describe it then???

Describe what?

[Daywalker]

Mike,

Orthodox preterists do in fact believe that Matthew 24 is past. However, they do not believe that Matthew 24 speaks of the Second Coming (at least up to verse 34) - so for you to equate the two is not representing the view fairly. I am not saying you are purposefuly being unfair, maybe you did not know. Now you do.



If any orthodox preterist said that to you, you are correct that they are sloppy and incorrect. I suspect you may be confusing orthodox preterists with heretical preterists, but again, sloppiness is typical on Paltalk so I would not be surprised. But no, speaking as a doctrine, the event known as the "Second Coming" is not believed to have happened in 70AD. Of course, there may certainly be sloppiness in thinking and terminology.



No that would be rank heresy if followed through consistently.



Describe what?
Then how DOES the temple being destroyed effect anything in Matt. 24 in relation to Christ's second Coming. Because it looks to me like it is one smooth flow throughout the chapter. Do you insert any GAPS into the prophecy? If so, where, why, and HOW so in THIS chapter (Matt.24)?...
Grace.
Mike
PS. Since the entire context of Matt. 24 CENTERS on the Coming of Christ, I am eagerly awaiting your reply

[dizzle]

Then how DOES the temple being destroyed effect anything in Matt. 24 in relation to Christ's second Coming. Because it looks to me like it is one smooth flow throughout the chapter. Do you insert any GAPS into the prophecy? If so, where, why, and HOW so in THIS chapter (Matt.24)?...
Grace.
Mike
PS. Since the entire context of Matt. 24 CENTERS on the Coming of Christ, I am eagerly awaiting your reply

No Mike, no gaps at all. We are talking past each other and I suspect this is what happened with you and any orthodox preterists on Paltalk. It happens often with many. You hear that Matthew 24 is fulfilled and because you believe that passage is about the Second Coming, in your own paradigm you substitute that the ortho pret is saying the Second Coming is fulfilled. But you need to understand that ortho prets as a rule do not believe that the coming in Matthew 24 is the second coming. So yes, that coming is over, finished done, but that is not the second coming. That is where the confusion is coming in. Sir Yap Alot and I are having a debate on this very issue. I invite you to be a spectator and breathe some life into the commentary thread, that would be most welcome.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

No Mike, no gaps at all. We are talking past each other and I suspect this is what happened with you and any orthodox preterists on Paltalk. It happens often with many. You hear that Matthew 24 is fulfilled and because you believe that passage is about the Second Coming, in your own paradigm you substitute that the ortho pret is saying the Second Coming is fulfilled. But you need to understand that ortho prets as a rule do not believe that the coming in Matthew 24 is the second coming. So yes, that coming is over, finished done, but that is not the second coming. That is where the confusion is coming in. Sir Yap Alot and I are having a debate on this very issue. I invite you to be a spectator and breathe some life into the commentary thread, that would be most welcome.
If I may interject a comment here. I know that sometimes when I am speaking with people who are not familiar with preterism, I sometimes refer to the Mat. 24 as "a coming" of Jesus "behold you will see the Son of Man coming in the clouds". That is to use a term that these people are familiar with in the context of Mat. 24 (they think it is talking about the 2nd physical coming).

I think some of the confusion could be aleviated if we recognize that Jesus coming in judgement in AD 70 is not the same thing as His 2nd coming.

Hope this helps.

[Daywalker]

No Mike, no gaps at all. We are talking past each other and I suspect this is what happened with you and any orthodox preterists on Paltalk. It happens often with many. You hear that Matthew 24 is fulfilled and because you believe that passage is about the Second Coming, in your own paradigm you substitute that the ortho pret is saying the Second Coming is fulfilled. But you need to understand that ortho prets as a rule do not believe that the coming in Matthew 24 is the second coming. So yes, that coming is over, finished done, but that is not the second coming. That is where the confusion is coming in. Sir Yap Alot and I are having a debate on this very issue. I invite you to be a spectator and breathe some life into the commentary thread, that would be most welcome.

So it is a "coming", but not the Second Coming. Then what was so special about that Matt. 24 coming in your view? What did it "do" for anybody? Why did it have to happen?
In MY school of thought, it would be the restoration of the kingdom for Israel as well as Christ's governmental control of the nations reconfirmed.

Also, WILL Israel ever get her kingdom restored on earth? Will she ever be the head of the nations?

[dizzle]

So it is a "coming", but not the Second Coming.

Exactly.


Then what was so special about that Matt. 24 coming in your view? What did it "do" for anybody? Why did it have to happen?

That is quite a bit there. Again I have very little time so I would have to refer you to the Wrestlefest going on and to follow my debate with Yap. Maybe though some other preterist here would like to answer you to take up my lack of time. If I find a post I did that lays it all out elsewhere, I stick the link of up here.


In MY school of thought, it would be the restoration of the kingdom for Israel as well as Christ's governmental control of the nations reconfirmed.

You and I differ on the identity of Israel and what the rulership of Christ means. In MY view it is the vindication of true Israel and the vindication and proof of Christ's reign over the nations.


Also, WILL Israel ever get her kingdom restored on earth? Will she ever be the head of the nations?

True Israel already is, and is becoming, until the consummation. Israel as an ethno-political reality in God's plan is forever done away with. The true Israel which has always existed as a remnant continues and will continue to the consummation. The consummation is the Second Coming.

[Daywalker]

You and I differ on the identity of Israel and what the rulership of Christ means. In MY view it is the vindication of true Israel and the vindication and proof of Christ's reign over the nations.

True Israel already is, and is becoming, until the consummation. Israel as an ethno-political reality in God's plan is forever done away with. The true Israel which has always existed as a remnant continues and will continue to the consummation. The consummation is the Second Coming.

To Dee Dee or any other Partial Preterist...

Why couldn't God, IN YOUR VIEW, take the faithful remnant that comes from the Jewish lineage and make them an ethno-political ruling body and having believing Gentiles as an EXTENSION of their reign...all of them, mind you, operating under the headship of Christ?

To me, the Israel of God is the believing remnant among the Jews...those that were "in Isaac". The other nations were merely grafted into them.
How does Preterism see this vs. Full Preterism?

I will be watching your debate when I get the chance...

[dizzle]

I hope you participate in the commentary threads too.

[Daywalker]

I hope you participate in the commentary threads too.
I won't be at the keys, but Charlie will be :lol: :wink:

[Jude3b]

Does anybody know the name of the churches that Preterists and
Amils are found in?

[dizzle]

any and all. I don't attend a "preterist" church, my church is dispensational

[Secretary of Education - Colin the Cat]

So I take you skip the Sunday Night "Revelations" Classes, huh? :lol:

[Daywalker]

any and all. I don't attend a "preterist" church, my church is dispensational
Well, if they are MIDActs, please accept my apologies... :eek: :lol:

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

any and all. I don't attend a "preterist" church, my church is dispensational
Ditto for me. Needless to say I won't be teaching eschatology there anytime soon (but I sure would like to :rant: )

[Secretary of Education - Colin the Cat]

:haha: :faramir:

[GhostontheNet]

As to what's special about this Parousia in a preterist eschatology, I can think of several things. Before the fulfillment it provides Christians with the knowledge of events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem so they have the foreknowledge to evade the disaster Christ has elsewhere spoken of by leaving Judea. After the fulfillment this would have the same relevance as any other fulfilled prophecy; it's evidence for the gospels. This would enable a case for Jesus as a true prophet in all respects; definately not the false prophet skeptics claim he is. A third point of relevance is that according to Daniel, Christ has recieved Glory, Dominion, and a Kingdom, I see no good reason to slight the relevance of this in particular.

As to Dispensational Futurist churches, it reminds me of a guy speaking on prophecy in one I attend. It was kind of depressing, he was talking at one point about how he knew that the rocky mountains and all other mountains would soon be leveled. :doh: Perhaps he had had too many suns, moons, and stars flung at him.

[studyhound]

As to Dispensational Futurist churches, it reminds me of a guy speaking on prophecy in one I attend. It was kind of depressing, he was talking at one point about how he knew that the rocky mountains and all other mountains would soon be leveled. :doh: Perhaps he had had too many suns, moons, and stars flung at him.
:lol:

[Daywalker]

As to what's special about this Parousia in a preterist eschatology, I can think of several things. Before the fulfillment it provides Christians with the knowledge of events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem so they have the foreknowledge to evade the disaster Christ has elsewhere spoken of by leaving Judea. After the fulfillment this would have the same relevance as any other fulfilled prophecy; it's evidence for the gospels. This would enable a case for Jesus as a true prophet in all respects; definately not the false prophet skeptics claim he is. A third point of relevance is that according to Daniel, Christ has recieved Glory, Dominion, and a Kingdom, I see no good reason to slight the relevance of this in particular.
As to whether or not Christ was a false prophet or not, they would have known in Jer. 18 that God COULD change his mind about the timing of coming



As to Dispensational Futurist churches, it reminds me of a guy speaking on prophecy in one I attend. It was kind of depressing, he was talking at one point about how he knew that the rocky mountains and all other mountains would soon be leveled. :doh: Perhaps he had had too many suns, moons, and stars flung at him.
Not yet, but stick around :wink:

[dizzle]

As to whether or not Christ was a false prophet or not, they would have known in Jer. 18 that God COULD change his mind about the timing of coming

Have you seen my response to this argument in the Wrestlefest Mike? I cannot really debate it right now in order to keep that debate there, but I was wondering if you had saw that. Maybe if so, you can respond to it in the commentary thread and then maybe after that debate is done we can get into it.

[Daywalker]

Have you seen my response to this argument in the Wrestlefest Mike? I cannot really debate it right now in order to keep that debate there, but I was wondering if you had saw that. Maybe if so, you can respond to it in the commentary thread and then maybe after that debate is done we can get into it.
No, I have not.

[GhostontheNet]

Daywalker: I don't think the implied repentence argument works here. While abandoning fulfilling a prophecy if it's no longer moral to act upon makes sense, I don't think there's any reason to suspect such is the case here. The account of Eusebius quoting Josephus and some other author(s?) on the martyrdom of James the Just (brother of Jesus) as late as 64 A.D. (if my memory serves me right) comes to mind. Here James is asked to clarify what he means by "Jesus the door" and he gives a speech that is obviously Christian. In light of James' high reputation the Jewish leadership are none too happy about letting him speak of his brother as savior instead of fraud in the temple; and they kill him. Eusebius also mentions the shorter account in Josephus of this same martyrdom (the same place as the well known "James, brother of Jesus, the so called Christ" passage I think). In light of this account, because I see it as an indicator of the attitude towards Christianity in general, I see no reason to expect a repentence by the people of the day to avoid the coming wrath upon them. I don't think this coming on the clouds is the second coming at all; rather a divine judgement given vivid language. If any fellow Preterists or anyone else has the reference on hand to the passage about YHWH riding on a swift cloud against Egypt with trembling Idols it would be useful.

Studyhound: Luckily I was late for church and was outside the room when I heard that, had I laughed inside the room I don't think it would've been a good situation. Afterwards I quietly faced up to the revived roman empire feet and the like without disruption.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

If any fellow Preterists or anyone else has the reference on hand to the passage about YHWH riding on a swift cloud against Egypt with trembling Idols it would be useful.An oracle concerning Egypt. Behold, the LORD is riding on a swift cloud and comes to Egypt; and the idols of Egypt will tremble at his presence, and the heart of the Egyptians will melt within them.

Is that the one? IMHO one of the strongest supports for the preterist interpritation of the Olivet Discourse. :teeth:


















:offtopic:
Studyhound: Luckily I was late for church and was outside the room when I heard that, had I laughed inside the room I don't think it would've been a good situation. Afterwards I quietly faced up to the revived roman empire feet and the like without disruption.I was in a similar situation. The choir and orchestra from my church were performing for another church's revival. I had recently left the orchestra becasue it kept me out of Sunday School and I wanted to get into more structured bible study. I went with the choir because my wife was in it. It was the job of the members from my churh in the audience to be a "pep squad" for the choir to encourge the audience to "get into the spirit" (This is difficult enough for me since it is not my typical behavior but I was doing my faithful duty as best as I could:b_splits: ). But for the first time I paid attention to the words of this particular song (I had played the songe a dozen times, but never paid that much attention to the words), and this song has got to be the most theologically bankrupt song I have ever heard (but it does have a catchy tune:bass:). The chorus is all about Jesus coming in the clouds at the sound of the trumpet (and this being a good thing we should look forward to :argh:). Needless to say, I couldn't even fake enthusiasm anymore:b_rotten: . Fortunately no one noticed. :whew:

[Lee1023]

Faramir, You asked me what my position is awhile back and I have been busy and haven't responded. Sorry!! I am probably a hybrid of sorts I suppose. As for the tribulation - done. Jesus told his followers that when they see the city encircled about they should pray their fleeing not be in winter time ..... That happned, the Roman army circle the city, broke and went back to Rome. When they left, the followers of Christ fled the city. Josephus records that no followers of the "way" were killed when Rome cam back and leveled the city. He also talkes about how terrible the seige of Jerusalem was - parents ate their children, and the blood ran bridle deep to horses (TERRIBLE).

In Him,
Lee1023

[kofh2u]

Ditto for me. Needless to say I won't be teaching eschatology there anytime soon (but I sure would like to :rant: )


Hello farim...

I was hoping to get the preterist view on Rev 17, from our last conversation on tge other thread...

But, if you're pressed for time on that, what about this quetion, here, in this thread?

How does the preterist account for Rev 5:4-5 in regard for the Sevond Coming?

Rev. 5:4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the ancient accounts in his Unconscious Mind, neither to look thereon.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Hello farim...



I was hoping to get the preterist view on Rev 17, from our last conversation on tge other thread...



But, if you're pressed for time on that, what about this quetion, here, in this thread?



How does the preterist account for Rev 5:4-5 in regard for the Sevond Coming?



Rev. 5:4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the ancient accounts in his Unconscious Mind, neither to look thereon.




Well, I thought I did give at least an overview of my view on Rev. 17. And if you have specific questions, I would love to answer them, but you are right I don’t have time, nor do I think it would be beneficial to give a specific detailing of my interpretation (it would take several pages and not many people would have the time to follow it all even if they were so inclined to read my meager opinions)



But I repeat. Any specific questions I will be happy to answer.



Now, on to the question at hand:





4and I began to weep loudly because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it. 5And one of the elders said to me, "Weep no more; behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals."



Notices I used ESV, which is my favorite translation. While I find your use of the Freudian translation interesting, I prefer to use a translation that translates the actual words of the text without filtering it through our modern culture (btw I have the same critique of the NIV as I do of the Freudian version, but to a far lesser degree.)



Well this is clearly Jesus being talked about here. But why would one think that this was His second coming. Remember this all takes place in heaven right? (See Rev. 4 the previous chapter for reference). There is no mention of any second coming there. I see this conquering as Jesus victory through His death burial and resurrection. The scroll is representative of a Covenant. Jesus made the new covenant possible by His atoning work on the Cross-and His subsequent Resurrection.

[GhostontheNet]

Leo: Interesting data, especially because I remember Ferrar Fenton's comment in his Holy Bible in Modern English on "the way" being another name for early Christianity at Acts 9:2. "2 NOTE. - "The Way" was the first name by which the Christian Faith was distinguished, and St. Paul so calls it even in his latest epistles.-F.F." Is this passage close to the first attempted siege of Jerusalem abandoned at Nero's death (in a sense of book space)? If so I think I can easily pin it down for future reference. Also, Eusebius' Proof of the Gospels mentions a similar event.

[kofh2u]

1) Well, I thought I did give at least an overview of my view on Rev. 17. And if you have specific questions, I would love to answer them, but you are right I don’t have time, nor do I think it would be beneficial to give a specific detailing of my interpretation (it would take several pages and not many people would have the time to follow it all even if they were so inclined to read my meager opinions)

But I repeat. Any specific questions I will be happy to answer.



Now, on to the question at hand:





2) 4and I began to weep loudly because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it. 5And one of the elders said to me, "Weep no more; behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals."

3) Notices I used ESV, which is my favorite translation.

4) While I find your use of the Freudian translation interesting, I prefer to use a translation that translates the actual words of the text without filtering it through our modern culture (btw I have the same critique of the NIV as I do of the Freudian version, but to a far lesser degree.)



5) Well this is clearly Jesus being talked about here. But why would one think that this was His second coming.

6) Remember this all takes place in heaven right?

7) (See Rev. 4 the previous chapter for reference). There is no mention of any second coming there. I see this conquering as Jesus victory through His death burial and resurrection. The scroll is representative of a Covenant. Jesus made the new covenant possible by His atoning work on the Cross-and His subsequent Resurrection.


Hi mr fari...
Thanx for the giving me time on this.

I wonder if your answers reflect some sect or another, a body of people who all concur with what you are telling me. Or, perhaps this is all your own personal insight to the meanings and symbolism?


Would this be a preterist point of view, or one of a number of subdivision of preterism? I doubt that you are on that other side of those interpretors, the Futurists, right?

I won't take your time with many questions, but as per your reco: (see # 7, above) to read and consider Rev 4 when trying to understand Rev 5...

QUESTION:
In your philosophy, the first word in Revelation 4: "AFTER this..."

Having read chapters 1-3, which seem, undeniably,to be describing a SOCIOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT of an evolving Church of Jesus...

...one which ends in a time, Laocidea, when that church is very successful, rich, established, secure, and overconfident... like today...

Do you agree that Rev 4 is talking about something that happens "After thus"....?

Rev. 4:1 After this I looked, and, behold, the open door of the Church of Philadelphia, the Protestant Movement of the 17th Century, was set before me, opened to heaven of my mind, as if my thoughts were a spiritual entity in a heaven above: and the first voice which I heard in my head was, as it were, of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will show thee insights into that which must be hereafter, following the maturation of the seven church stages of growth and development.

[GhostontheNet]

Kohfu: For the moment please use a translation that doesn't tamper with the original text to suit modern ideas and interpretations, including the church/age hypothesis. I must ask you this question, why not interpret these churces literally, as there were 7 churches of these names at the same time? As to the Church of Philadelphia, can you make a case for 17th century persecutions by "...them of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know I have loved thee." Revelations 3:9 KJV? This fits much better with First Century Jewish Persecutions documented in Acts and other places, sometimes unexpected (the Crestus passage in Seutonius comes to mind, as well as the James passage I mentioned earlier in this thread in Eusebius).

[dizzle]

Ghost you are preterist right?

[GhostontheNet]

Ghost you are preterist right?
Yes, why bother asking?

[dizzle]

Because I don't get to read much, I have been ill, and with so many posters, I sometimes get confused, so I wanted to make sure I had my facts straight. Thanks.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Revelation 22:20 (NIV)
20 He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.”
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

So in your opinion Jesus was not using a “Preterist soon” here.
:attn:

That is not the orthodox preterist position. The book of Revelation is about judgment (7 seals, bowls, trumpets and all)

Jesus was coming in Judgement soon. Like the nurmerous time in the OT that it talks about God coming in Judgement.

So yes, Jesus was talking about coming soon, preterist soon. He was not talking about His second physical coming.

Revelations does talk about the physical return of Jesus, but that happens after the millenium.

[Assistant Junior Deputy Janitor Analogman]

Ok, I'm way confused now (as a recovering dispy, I need to go to more DA meetings, I guess). So who is saying "Come Lord Jesus" and why are they saying that?

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Ok, I'm way confused now (as a recovering dispy, I need to go to more DA meetings, I guess). So who is saying "Come Lord Jesus" and why are they saying that?
Recovering Dispy? Me too. I knew there was a reason I like you. :grin:

Of course I'm confused now. What are you referring to when you say someone is saying, "Come Lord Jesus"? :huh:

[Assistant Junior Deputy Janitor Analogman]

"He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming soon."
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus."

Thats Rev. 22:20

If he was coming "soon" as in judgement, who is saying "Come, Lord Jesus"??

[GhostontheNet]

theanalogman: Errm, John of course. If you imply that John wouldn't have said this if it wasn't the second coming, you should note something; John would have been eager to see either the second coming or the avenging of first century martyrs as this book shows and would have probably reacted the same way to a declaration that either would occur soon.

[Theolog]

:attn:

That is not the orthodox preterist position. The book of Revelation is about judgment (7 seals, bowls, trumpets and all)

Jesus was coming in Judgement soon. Like the nurmerous time in the OT that it talks about God coming in Judgement.

So yes, Jesus was talking about coming soon, preterist soon. He was not talking about His second physical coming.

Revelations does talk about the physical return of Jesus, but that happens after the millenium.
I will defend my position when I find out whereit is allowed. I deleted my post that had the information and then spaced it out.

[GhostontheNet]

I will defend my position when I find out whereit is allowed. I deleted my post that had the information and then spaced it out.
Comparative Religions 101 http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=47 .

[kofh2u]

Now, on to the question at hand:



4no man in heaven ( 1 ), nor in earth ( 2 ), neither under the earth ( 3 ), was able to open the book ( 4 ), neither to look thereon, and I began to weep loudly because no one was found worthy to open the scroll ( 5 ) or to look into it. 5And one of the elders ( 6 ) said to me, "Weep no more; behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah ( 7 ), the Root of David, ( 8 ) has conquered ( 9 ), so that he can open the scroll ( 10 ) and its seven ( 11 ) seals ( 12 ) ."



[/font][/color]



Well this is clearly Jesus being talked about here. But why would one think that this was His second coming. Remember this all takes place in heaven right? (See Rev. 4 the previous chapter for reference). There is no mention of any second coming there. I see this conquering as Jesus victory through His death burial and resurrection. The scroll is representative of a Covenant. Jesus made the new covenant possible by His atoning work on the Cross-and His subsequent Resurrection.


Thank you for the time here on this one part of Revelation.

Yes, we can revert to what we have long had before us in the standard translations. No problem, especially if we focus on each idea mentally or physically bracket each as I have illustrated above in (1) - (12). Then we see what is before us in this puzzle, do we not?

As regards the Freudian Interpretation, which, in that text, is bracketed as shown above, the interpretive is separated from the translation by supplying brackets around the Freudian interpretation.
I have been altering the text of the Freudian Translation by removing the brackets in order to supply a continuity for the post reader here.

I am not necessarily frozen in thought and unreflective about the fact that this Freudian accompaniment of Interpretation is "their" opinion. But I am impressed that this translation, while it does use foot notes and indicates correspondences elsewhere in the bible for these ithems, it specifically and directly states unequivically what "they" think it means.

This is in contrast with the long, often "windy", expositions and accompanied argument of explanation for those interpretation I have been reading elsewhere.

Note that without argument, the twelve bracketed mysteries are at least logically and complementarily related to one another in a cohesive and direct "fill in the blanks" methodology. That is its attraction for me.

My Question is, "How would those blanks look in your explanation?"

[kofh2u]

Kohfu: For the moment please use a translation that doesn't tamper with the original text to suit modern ideas and interpretations, including the church/age hypothesis. I must ask you this question, why not interpret these churces literally, as there were 7 churches of these names at the same time? As to the Church of Philadelphia, can you make a case for 17th century persecutions by "...them of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know I have loved thee." Revelations 3:9 KJV? This fits much better with First Century Jewish Persecutions documented in Acts and other places, sometimes unexpected (the Crestus passage in Seutonius comes to mind, as well as the James passage I mentioned earlier in this thread in Eusebius).

ghostonthenet, hello. I try to separate my responses below as best I can. I hope they make sense.

Kohfu: For the moment please use a translation that doesn't tamper...

(KOFH: please excuse the license I took in removing brackets supplied in the Freudian Bible Interpretation which accompanied the Freudian Bible Translation. I will type out the exact Freudian verses in the future. They basically are the standard translation pretty much, followed with bracketed interpretation of that translation where applicable.)

...with the original text to suit modern ideas...

(KOFH: I hope this is our goal, modern underdtanding. As the concept of translation implies, changing the understanding of one foreign or ancient expression of the text into understandable ideas in the other, right?
We are all guessing what Revelation actually is communicating to us, now, today, in a symbolism of 2000 years ago. Right?)

... including the church/age hypothesis.

I must ask you this question, why not interpret these churches literally, as there were 7 churches of these names at the same time?

(ANSWER: They can't be literal!
One of them was long destroyed, totally, by earthquake, I believe, @ 30 years before John wrote the Revelation.
The seven churches MUST be figurative.)


As to the Church of Philadelphia, can you make a case for 17th century persecutions by Scripture Verse:


(KOFH: YES.
This is the Freudian Translation with bracketed Freudian Interpretations:

"...them of the synagogue of Satan (RCC), who say they are Jews (circumcised in their hearts), and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them (the RCC congregations) to come and worship before thy feet (Protestant Movement), and to know I have loved thee." Revelations 3:9 )

KJV
? This fits much better with First Century Jewish Persecutions documented in Acts and other places, sometimes unexpected (the Crestus passage in Seutonius comes to mind, as well as the James passage I mentioned earlier in this thread in Eusebius).

(RESPONSE BY KOFH:
Yes it is a fitting analogy.
I can see why John appropriated it as such. Remember that, when this was written, one of the 7 churches did not exist anymore, so it seems obviously to be a simile or metaphor, does it not.

[studyhound]

(ANSWER: They can't be literal!
One of them was long destroyed, totally, by earthquake, I believe, @ 30 years before John wrote the Revelation.
The seven churches MUST be figurative.)

Well that not quite true, the only one that was destroyed by earthquake was Laodicea, but it was rebuilt (fairly quickly IIRC) in the mid to late 50's to early 60's.

But all the churches were around till the end of the second century (most till far later) and many still exists today, usually under different names.

:studyhound:

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Thank you for the time here on this one part of Revelation.



Yes, we can revert to what we have long had before us in the standard translations. No problem, especially if we focus on each idea mentally or physically bracket each as I have illustrated above in (1) - (12). Then we see what is before us in this puzzle, do we not?



As regards the Freudian Interpretation, which, in that text, is bracketed as shown above, the interpretive is separated from the translation by supplying brackets around the Freudian interpretation. I have been altering the text of the Freudian Translation by removing the brackets in order to supply a continuity for the post reader here.



I am not necessarily frozen in thought and unreflective about the fact that this Freudian accompaniment of Interpretation is "their" opinion. But I am impressed that this translation, while it does use foot notes and indicates correspondences elsewhere in the bible for these ithems, it specifically and directly states unequivically what "they" think it means.



This is in contrast with the long, often "windy", expositions and accompanied argument of explanation for those interpretation I have been reading elsewhere.



Well I am sure that if the interpreters of the Freudian Bible included all of their rationale and Psychoanalytical theory in the text explaining why they interpret the way they do, then it too would be “windy”



IOW anyone can assert an interpretation of scripture. But to give a rationale for an interpretation take a lot more effort a lot more work and a lot more words. I am glad that many expositors are “windy”. That way I get a better understanding of the rationale and method that they use to arrive at their conclusions, not just blanket assertions as to what their conclusions are.



Also, I do not think that exclusively applying a 19th psychological theory to an ancient near east document is a very good way to ascertain the original intent of the author. At best what you will get is a psychoanalysis of what the analyst thinks is the original intent of the author. All done (apparently) without consideration of language cultural and historical factors.



Just me :2cents:





Note that without argument, the twelve bracketed mysteries are at least logically and complementarily related to one another in a cohesive and direct "fill in the blanks" methodology. That is its attraction for me.



My Question is, "How would those blanks look in your explanation?"



4no man in heaven ( 1 ), nor in earth ( 2 ), neither under the earth ( 3 ), was able to open the book ( 4 ), neither to look thereon, and I began to weep loudly because no one was found worthy to open the scroll ( 5 ) or to look into it. 5And one of the elders ( 6 ) said to me, "Weep no more; behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah ( 7 ), the Root of David, ( 8 ) has conquered ( 9 ), so that he can open the scroll ( 10 ) and its seven ( 11 ) seals ( 12 ) ."

[/quote]

In order avoid being “windy” I will answer your question but will not provide a detailed explanation of how I arrived at this conclusion.



1-3 are a group and do not need separate “interpretation” Including “heaven earth and under the earth” is a sign of completeness stressing that absolutely no one ever is qualified to open the book.



4-5 refers to the book or scroll (it is the same word in the Greek) mentioned in v. 1 and 2 of this chapter. This book represents the breaking of the old covenant and establishing of the new covenant.



6 one of the 24 elders mentioned in chapter 4. The elders could be angels or representatives of the 12 tribes of Israel (2 for each tribe) or both (angels that act as representative of the 12 tribes).



7-8 are clearly talking about Jesus. The Gospels stated that Jesus is descended from David who in turn is descended from Judah. The “Lion” of Juday and the “Root” of David are messianic terms derived from the Old Testament.



9 conquered means conquered, IOW Jesus by conquering is worthy of opening the scroll



10 (see 4-5)



11 seven is the number of perfection in ancient Semitic literature



12 seals were used by ancient cultures to insure authenticity in a document (ie scroll).





Hope this helps.