my world turned upside down because of eschatology!

[Thedonhopeless]

Hi!

I would like to ask some questions, based on numerous explanations from all sides of this particular ring of debate.

First, some quick background.

I forever just about, believed the tribulation and prophecies of the olivate discourse, Daniel and revalations and the like were future events. Never have I questioned this position nor anyone question this position of me.

Until I stumbled upon it accidently. It imemdiatley alienated me from my beliefs, and I felt as a cultist would when they leave their cult and see the world in its actual light, dazed, confused and a lil abandoned!

BUt, beeing a seeker of all truths, I didn't panic, so I looked into it, and the fire I walked through was immense! Total confusion!

There seems to be great and effective arguements on most sides and seeing that I wanted to know the absolute truth, and know God and every truth about Him, you can imagine my frustration at all the different sides and points of views which were so eloquently and persuasively expressed.

I have come across many questions, some that I will ask here, in hopes to better come to terms with this subject and to make a better informed choice of what to believe.

I know that alot of these questions are probably answered elsewhere, but please bare with me on this, I beg you. My mind is in pieces from reading what seems hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of different articles, books and threads in this very website.

Right now, what do I believe on this issue? NOTHING. I cannot come to any terms with the situation at all! i don't like to believe false things, so in order to come to terms with this I must know the absolute truth, or atleast a pretty darn good reason to believe what may not be known for sure.

So without any further ado, let my questions begin. :smile:

1. Does this topic effect salvation? Meaning, is it vital I choose a side and the RIGHT side, in order to fulfil my belief in God and put my faith in Him?

2. If not, is it ok to ignore the issue altogether? (heh)

3. If we can agree the Holy Spirit gives believers truth, understanding ect of Jesus, why does the Holy Spirit seem to give so many seemingly intelligent and faithful followers conflicting information? If you boil this down to logic, only one group can be right if the Holy Spirit gives insight and understanding..so whoever is right on this, everyone else is not getting this from the Holy Spirit? Thats the logic at hand, and the question.

4. If the tribulation ect already happened, in 70 a.d, what are we doing now? If God inflicted his judgement, why let the world continue on? Why let thousands of years pass, and the world decompossing year by year?

5. I hear about this 1000 years thing..well whether it is literal or not, does anyone have any proof at all that there is any span of time satan was cast into the pit and didn't influence nations? I mean, without the influence of satan, that would be a pretty peaceful stetch of time, no? And when exactly did the 1k occur, or is it to occur at another time? If it occured after the trib of 70ad, wouldn't there be a span of peace?

6.*edited for redundancy*

7. I read on these forums from..Faramir (sp?), that the mount of olives splitting in two means nations or peoples if I am correct, because there is much language in the bible used to describe nations as mountains ect. Yes, I agree this language is used, but never in such a specific way. Jesus is pretty specific in saying "Mount of Olives" that splits in two..not just mountains or mountain. he is very specific and names it. can anyone reconcile this difference? Because mnt Olives is clearly not split in two.

8. Rev talks about many going apostate from the church, or a great falling away, right? How can a church that has barely begun, already have loads of people fall away?

9. do preterists believe in second coming of Christ? As in, ok 70ad the prophecies fulfilled, did he take believers away at that or soem poitn during all that? And now, He will come again at some time to take the rest?

10. If the above is affirmative, He did come during trib round 70ad, who was left to propogate the church?

11. I heard it said many palces, that the preterist view makes more sense of the bible, it beautifully puts it in chronoligcal order or soemthing and reconciles all the wishy washy holes of a futuristic view. Can anyone briefly or not briefly, explain how this is? Like, what were any mysteries about the futuristic understanding and how preterism better explains these, or vise versa? Liek specific scriptures that you were questioning about one or the other?


12. a.What is the meaning of putting satan in a pit for 1000 years (literal or not), then re-releasing him for a awhile? b. if this 1k years happened already, is this the time he is rereleased? because obviously, he is about in our time.

I have like 15 or 20 more questions, but for the sake of anyone's sanity who decides to answer any of these, I will await another time to ask the rest.

[eschaton]

Hi!

I would like to ask some questions, based on numerous explanations from all sides of this particular ring of debate.

First, some quick background.

I forever just about, believed the tribulation and prophecies of the olivate discourse, Daniel and revalations and the like were future events. Never have I questioned this position nor anyone question this position of me.

Until I stumbled upon it accidently. It imemdiatley alienated me from my beliefs, and I felt as a cultist would when they leave their cult and see the world in its actual light, dazed, confused and a lil abandoned!

BUt, beeing a seeker of all truths, I didn't panic, so I looked into it, and the fire I walked through was immense! Total confusion!

There seems to be great and effective arguements on most sides and seeing that I wanted to know the absolute truth, and know God and every truth about Him, you can imagine my frustration at all the different sides and points of views which were so eloquently and persuasively expressed.

I have come across many questions, some that I will ask here, in hopes to better come to terms with this subject and to make a better informed choice of what to believe.

I know that alot of these questions are probably answered elsewhere, but please bare with me on this, I beg you. My mind is in pieces from reading what seems hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of different articles, books and threads in this very website.

Right now, what do I believe on this issue? NOTHING. I cannot come to any terms with the situation at all! i don't like to believe false things, so in order to come to terms with this I must know the absolute truth, or atleast a pretty darn good reason to believe what may not be known for sure.

So without any further ado, let my questions begin. :smile:

1. Does this topic effect salvation? Meaning, is it vital I choose a side and the RIGHT side, in order to fulfil my belief in God and put my faith in Him?

2. If not, is it ok to ignore the issue altogether? (heh)

3. If we can agree the Holy Spirit gives believers truth, understanding ect of Jesus, why does the Holy Spirit seem to give so many seemingly intelligent and faithful followers conflicting information? If you boil this down to logic, only one group can be right if the Holy Spirit gives insight and understanding..so whoever is right on this, everyone else is not getting this from the Holy Spirit? Thats the logic at hand, and the question.

4. If the tribulation ect already happened, in 70 a.d, what are we doing now? If God inflicted his judgement, why let the world continue on? Why let thousands of years pass, and the world decompossing year by year?

5. I hear about this 1000 years thing..well whether it is literal or not, does anyone have any proof at all that there is any span of time satan was cast into the pit and didn't influence nations? I mean, without the influence of satan, that would be a pretty peaceful stetch of time, no? And when exactly did the 1k occur, or is it to occur at another time? If it occured after the trib of 70ad, wouldn't there be a span of peace?

6.*edited for redundancy*

7. I read on these forums from..Faramir (sp?), that the mount of olives splitting in two means nations or peoples if I am correct, because there is much language in the bible used to describe nations as mountains ect. Yes, I agree this language is used, but never in such a specific way. Jesus is pretty specific in saying "Mount of Olives" that splits in two..not just mountains or mountain. he is very specific and names it. can anyone reconcile this difference? Because mnt Olives is clearly not split in two.

8. Rev talks about many going apostate from the church, or a great falling away, right? How can a church that has barely begun, already have loads of people fall away?

9. do preterists believe in second coming of Christ? As in, ok 70ad the prophecies fulfilled, did he take believers away at that or soem poitn during all that? And now, He will come again at some time to take the rest?

10. If the above is affirmative, He did come during trib round 70ad, who was left to propogate the church?

11. I heard it said many palces, that the preterist view makes more sense of the bible, it beautifully puts it in chronoligcal order or soemthing and reconciles all the wishy washy holes of a futuristic view. Can anyone briefly or not briefly, explain how this is? Like, what were any mysteries about the futuristic understanding and how preterism better explains these, or vise versa? Liek specific scriptures that you were questioning about one or the other?


12. a.What is the meaning of putting satan in a pit for 1000 years (literal or not), then re-releasing him for a awhile? b. if this 1k years happened already, is this the time he is rereleased? because obviously, he is about in our time.

I have like 15 or 20 more questions, but for the sake of anyone's sanity who decides to answer any of these, I will await another time to ask the rest.


Hi Thedonhopeless,

I'm sure you're not alone in your plight. I urge you to be patient in your tribulation and God will find you worthy. I have been interested in Bible prophecy most of my life so I would like to offer my opinions.

1. If you have to be 100% theologically correct about everything to be saved, then I'm afraid nobody will be saved. So I don't believe it is necessary to have the correct eschatological beliefs to be saved. Just accept Jesus as your Savior and the faith that God gives. (Eph 2:8 Eph 2:5 Ro 3:24 2Th 1:9)

2. I think we should all strive to understand these things so that we may be able to give an answer to anyone that asks. (1 Pet 3:15 Col 4:6 2Ti 2:25 )

3. The fact that prophecy isn't agreed upon is evidence that these things haven't been fulfilled. God doesn't allow complete understanding of the prophecies until after the fact as a way of revealing Himself. Some things aren't revealed by the Holy Spirit at this time. (1 Cor 13:12 1Co 13:9,10 )

4. I don't believe The tribulation happened in 70 AD.

5. Beware of interpreting the scriptures too literally, especially a book like the Revelation. There are many ideas you can explore on this.

7. I leave you to discuss that with Faramir, but I think that before you consider questions like this you should study methods of interpretation. The first thing to study is how Jesus and the biblical writers interpret the OT. Second, study how the church faters interpreted the scriptures. Origen's Philocalia (love of the beautiful) and Augustine's De Doctrina Christiana (On Christian Doctrine) are very good. I'm studying them myself. You may need to immerse yourself in studying the NT first and then the OT before you can appreciate what the fathers wers saying. Always do so with with humble prayer. Patience is the key.

8. Satan fights against the church with deception. (1 Pet 5:8 2Co 11:3 2:11 Ge 3:1-5 Mt 4:1-10 Ga 1:8)

9-12 I'll let preterists answer those. I'm not a preterist.

Alan F.

[Ted]

Thedon,

You are asking good questions. And before answering them directly, let me supply a couple of principles.

1. Always let the plain statements of scripture be the bedrock of your faith. When someone argues a less plain statement, fall back on the plain one until you have a very solid foundation that lets you stretch further.

2. Remember that the hope of the Christian is that Christ is returning for you. He can do this because He died for you, was buried, and rose on the third day. Paul says this is of “first importance” (1 Cor 15).

3. Remember that being a Christian means following Christ’s lead. And that means that we must study His word to learn what He wants us to do.

4. Christ makes up for our deficiencies.

Now to specific questions.

1. Does this topic effect salvation? Meaning, is it vital I choose a side and the RIGHT side, in order to fulfil my belief in God and put my faith in Him?
NO! Except as noted above. Eschatology is designed to build hope and tell us more about Jesus. It is not a part of an entrance exam at tht pearly gates.

2. If not, is it ok to ignore the issue altogether? (heh)
NO! As noted above, the core of eschatology is the hope of the Christian. Read 1 Cor 15.

3. If we can agree the Holy Spirit gives believers truth, understanding ect of Jesus, why does the Holy Spirit seem to give so many seemingly intelligent and faithful followers conflicting information? If you boil this down to logic, only one group can be right if the Holy Spirit gives insight and understanding..so whoever is right on this, everyone else is not getting this from the Holy Spirit? Thats the logic at hand, and the question.
Great question. And one I’m going to ask Jesus when He comes for me. It’s got to be that a lot of people aren’t listening to the Holy Spirit. (At least on this issue.) I suspect that many are infatuated with solving Rubik’s Cube, and forget to ask God what He is trying to tell us. Others, well... I won’t go any farther.

4. If the tribulation ect already happened, in 70 a.d, what are we doing now? If God inflicted his judgement, why let the world continue on? Why let thousands of years pass, and the world decompossing year by year?
Good question, but it presupposes a host of definitions. Until you sort out the definitions, you will not get an answer. For example, Matt 24 speaks of “a great tribulation” that (I believe) the text identifies as preceding AD70. Revelation 7 speaks of “the great tribulation.” The disciples and the church are told that they will have tribulation (many texts). Are these all the same? I think not. But now you are getting into the less clear area, and may find that waiting is wise.

My personal view on the passage of time is that it is related to the war between God and Satan. Satan has slandered God. God quarantined him to this earth, with a chance to prove his case. When every human has made a firm decision for or against God, Satan’s opportunity will have passed, and the court can sit to resolve the issue. Many have not permanently chosen sides, so the drama continues.

5. I hear about this 1000 years thing..well whether it is literal or not, does anyone have any proof at all that there is any span of time satan was cast into the pit and didn't influence nations? I mean, without the influence of satan, that would be a pretty peaceful stetch of time, no? And when exactly did the 1k occur, or is it to occur at another time? If it occured after the trib of 70ad, wouldn't there be a span of peace?
Perceptive observation! But again, this seems to be an unclear area (despite my view), and you will be able to get an overview of the discussion at another active thread. But, let that question hang a while. You need more foundation first.

7. I read on these forums from..Faramir (sp?), that the mount of olives splitting in two means nations or peoples if I am correct, because there is much language in the bible used to describe nations as mountains ect. Yes, I agree this language is used, but never in such a specific way. Jesus is pretty specific in saying "Mount of Olives" that splits in two..not just mountains or mountain. he is very specific and names it. can anyone reconcile this difference? Because mnt Olives is clearly not split in two.
Again, perceptive. But this is dealing with symbolic prophecy, and you need a good foundation in Hebrew thought before you dive in.

8. Rev talks about many going apostate from the church, or a great falling away, right? How can a church that has barely begun, already have loads of people fall away?
A good observation contra Preterism.

9. do preterists believe in second coming of Christ? As in, ok 70ad the prophecies fulfilled, did he take believers away at that or soem poitn during all that? And now, He will come again at some time to take the rest?
I’ve been asking that for a while. I can’t seem to get a clear answer. DeeDee has pointed me to an essay on her site, but I still don’t understand her answer.

11. I heard it said many palces, that the preterist view makes more sense of the bible, it beautifully puts it in chronoligcal order or soemthing and reconciles all the wishy washy holes of a futuristic view. Can anyone briefly or not briefly, explain how this is? Like, what were any mysteries about the futuristic understanding and how preterism better explains these, or vise versa? Liek specific scriptures that you were questioning about one or the other?
I would argue the opposite. But be careful. “Futurism” is a fuzzy term. It commonly speaks of the Dispensational view. In my view, there is a lot of prophecy that remains future, hence I could be called a futurist. At the same time, I strongly argue against Dispensationalism, and have written a book, I Want to be Left Behind that presents their errors and builds a biblical world view that has much future, and is neither Preterist nor Dispensationalist.

I’ll stop here. Prophecy can be fascinating, but if we lose track of the fact that it’s all about Jesus, we are almost guaranteed to get on the wrong track. (It’s not about the Jews!)

Ted

[spiritmech]

1. Does this topic effect salvation? Meaning, is it vital I choose a side and the RIGHT side, in order to fulfil my belief in God and put my faith in Him?


I would say no.


2. If not, is it ok to ignore the issue altogether? (heh)


Yes.


3. If we can agree the Holy Spirit gives believers truth, understanding ect of Jesus, why does the Holy Spirit seem to give so many seemingly intelligent and faithful followers conflicting information? If you boil this down to logic, only one group can be right if the Holy Spirit gives insight and understanding..so whoever is right on this, everyone else is not getting this from the Holy Spirit? Thats the logic at hand, and the question.


Aye, that's the rub. My solution: become Catholic and let the Pope decide.


4. If the tribulation ect already happened, in 70 a.d, what are we doing now? If God inflicted his judgement, why let the world continue on? Why let thousands of years pass, and the world decompossing year by year?


There is still judgement, after the 2nd coming. He has a plan to let the church do something. I won't tell you what I think it's supposed to do.


5. I hear about this 1000 years thing..well whether it is literal or not, does anyone have any proof at all that there is any span of time satan was cast into the pit and didn't influence nations? I mean, without the influence of satan, that would be a pretty peaceful stetch of time, no? And when exactly did the 1k occur, or is it to occur at another time? If it occured after the trib of 70ad, wouldn't there be a span of peace?


If Satan is thrown into the pit, his minions may or may not still be running around during that time.



7. I read on these forums from..Faramir (sp?), that the mount of olives splitting in two means nations or peoples if I am correct, because there is much language in the bible used to describe nations as mountains ect. Yes, I agree this language is used, but never in such a specific way. Jesus is pretty specific in saying "Mount of Olives" that splits in two..not just mountains or mountain. he is very specific and names it. can anyone reconcile this difference? Because mnt Olives is clearly not split in two.


I think it's not literal. I probably disagree with Faramir on the exact interpretation.


8. Rev talks about many going apostate from the church, or a great falling away, right? How can a church that has barely begun, already have loads of people fall away?


Jesus had this same problem. Many fell away from following him before he was even crucified. The church always has, and always will, have to deal with apostasy, heresy, and to define what "true Christianity" means.


9. do preterists believe in second coming of Christ? As in, ok 70ad the prophecies fulfilled, did he take believers away at that or soem poitn during all that? And now, He will come again at some time to take the rest?


Full preterists believe 2nd coming happened in AD70. That is heresy. Partial preterists believe that the 2nd coming is still future. That is not heresy.


10. If the above is affirmative, He did come during trib round 70ad, who was left to propogate the church?


I'm not a full preterist so I'm not prepared to answer that one.


11. I heard it said many palces, that the preterist view makes more sense of the bible, it beautifully puts it in chronoligcal order or soemthing and reconciles all the wishy washy holes of a futuristic view. Can anyone briefly or not briefly, explain how this is? Like, what were any mysteries about the futuristic understanding and how preterism better explains these, or vise versa? Liek specific scriptures that you were questioning about one or the other?


It can be quite elegant. But elegance does not always mean correct.


12. a.What is the meaning of putting satan in a pit for 1000 years (literal or not), then re-releasing him for a awhile? b. if this 1k years happened already, is this the time he is rereleased? because obviously, he is about in our time.

a. Not sure. We'll have to ask God when we get to heaven.
b. Full preterists would have to say that Satan is no longer here and that the world is no longer fallen and whatever decay we see is just the result of thermodynamics, not theology.

SM

[spiritmech]

"NO! As noted above, the core of eschatology is the hope of the Christian. Read 1 Cor 15."

Actually I like Ted's answer better than my own for #2.
SM

[dizzle]

8. Rev talks about many going apostate from the church, or a great falling away, right? How can a church that has barely begun, already have loads of people fall away?

What verse are you referring to?

[Thedonhopeless]

first off, thanks to all who answered my questions, at a later time i will further inquiry those.

right now I will answer ddw's question:

There are multiple passages that speak of the great fallign away or apostasy, or atleast the idea of one:

1 timothy 4:1 The spirit explicitly says that in the end times certain men will rebel from the faith, giving their allegiance to decietful spirits and demonic doctrines.

2 thessalonians 2:3 Let noone decieve you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition

Revalation uses symbolism to describe em to fall away, and be decieved:

Revalation 12:3-4 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with 7 heads and 10 horns and 7 crowns on his heads. His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who wa sabotu to give birth, so that he might devour her child the moment it was born.

this correlates with daniel 8:10 and the little horn magnified himself against the host of heaven and he cast down to earth some of the host and some of the stars and he trampled them underfoot

well im not quite a scholar, but there is a whole theme of this falling away, or rebellion, which happens before the antichrist comes about. the dragon makes the stars fall before the child is born and devoured by him, which is the antichrist born of the woman. I can find the rest that make this allt ie together, but I am slow and this bit took awhile, so I will do rest later for you if you wish, or you can set me straight if that is what you seek, then I won't have to. heh


edit* let me state that I am NOT defending my statement about the great fallign away, I only put here in answer to your (ddw) question a few things of many which led me to believe this. Like I said, I believed certain things for a long while, and now I am full fo questions. I merely ask the honest question about the great falling away for an honest answer.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Hi!

I would like to ask some questions, based on numerous explanations from all sides of this particular ring of debate.

First, some quick background.

I forever just about, believed the tribulation and prophecies of the olivate discourse, Daniel and revalations and the like were future events. Never have I questioned this position nor anyone question this position of me.

Until I stumbled upon it accidently. It imemdiatley alienated me from my beliefs, and I felt as a cultist would when they leave their cult and see the world in its actual light, dazed, confused and a lil abandoned!

BUt, beeing a seeker of all truths, I didn't panic, so I looked into it, and the fire I walked through was immense! Total confusion!

There seems to be great and effective arguements on most sides and seeing that I wanted to know the absolute truth, and know God and every truth about Him, you can imagine my frustration at all the different sides and points of views which were so eloquently and persuasively expressed.

I have come across many questions, some that I will ask here, in hopes to better come to terms with this subject and to make a better informed choice of what to believe.

I know that alot of these questions are probably answered elsewhere, but please bare with me on this, I beg you. My mind is in pieces from reading what seems hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of different articles, books and threads in this very website.

Right now, what do I believe on this issue? NOTHING. I cannot come to any terms with the situation at all! i don't like to believe false things, so in order to come to terms with this I must know the absolute truth, or atleast a pretty darn good reason to believe what may not be known for sure.

Been there done that. At least to a certain extent.

So without any further ado, let my questions begin. :smile:

1. Does this topic effect salvation? Meaning, is it vital I choose a side and the RIGHT side, in order to fulfil my belief in God and put my faith in Him? Other than what Ted said about the ultimate hope of Christians being the future return of Christ and our glorious reserrection with Him being essential, the rest is up for grabs IMHO.

2. If not, is it ok to ignore the issue altogether? (heh)
No. We as Christians are called to study to show ourselves approved. "Panmillenialsm" (it will all pan out in the end) is not acceptible. This is coming from someone who was a panmillenialist for years. I am not saying that it is wrong not to have a position, as long as you are trying to figure out what scripture really says. But if you are undecided due to lazyness (as was I) then you have a problem (as did I). I would rather dialog with 1 futurist who had a well researched scriptural foundation for his/her position than a 100 preterist who believed preterism because their precher does.

3. If we can agree the Holy Spirit gives believers truth, understanding ect of Jesus, why does the Holy Spirit seem to give so many seemingly intelligent and faithful followers conflicting information? If you boil this down to logic, only one group can be right if the Holy Spirit gives insight and understanding..so whoever is right on this, everyone else is not getting this from the Holy Spirit? Thats the logic at hand, and the question.
I think it is wonderful that scriptures contain so many mysteries. I think it is intentional. 1. Scripture is the finite revelation of an infinite God. It is bound to be complex. 2. I enjoy having to dig and struggle to come to an understanding of scriptural truth. 3. The more I really dig into the meat of Scripture, the closer I get to God. If it were easy, what would Christians do to work on thier sanctification?

4. If the tribulation ect already happened, in 70 a.d, what are we doing now? If God inflicted his judgement, why let the world continue on? Why let thousands of years pass, and the world decompossing year by year?
As a preterist, I believe that the "tribulation" happened in AD 70, but it was not a judgment on the enitre world, but a judgment agains apostate Israel, the covenant people who rejected thier Messiah. (and as a result were 'cut off' from the covenant and the Church was grafted into the covenent). As far as the world "decompossing", I am not sure what you mean by that????

5. I hear about this 1000 years thing..well whether it is literal or not, does anyone have any proof at all that there is any span of time satan was cast into the pit and didn't influence nations? I mean, without the influence of satan, that would be a pretty peaceful stetch of time, no? And when exactly did the 1k occur, or is it to occur at another time? If it occured after the trib of 70ad, wouldn't there be a span of peace?


6.*edited for redundancy* Good question. One I am trying to answer myself. (See the mysteries of scritpure keep me occupied). :wink:

7. I read on these forums from..Faramir (sp?), that the mount of olives splitting in two means nations or peoples if I am correct, because there is much language in the bible used to describe nations as mountains ect. Yes, I agree this language is used, but never in such a specific way. Jesus is pretty specific in saying "Mount of Olives" that splits in two..not just mountains or mountain. he is very specific and names it. can anyone reconcile this difference? Because mnt Olives is clearly not split in two. Well the Mount of Olives in Zech 14 is a refference not to just any people but to the Covenent people of God, ethnic Jews. Zech. 13 tells of Christ coming to earth the first time, being rejected by a portion of the Jews and being rejected by a portion. Zech 14 is a continuation of 13t describing God destroying Jerusalem in judgment for that rejection, the splitting off of the covenant people with true Israel (Christian Jews) continuing in the covenant (with gentile Christians grafted into the covenant too) and the apostate Jews being 'cut off'. I could go into even more detail, but I hope that answers at least a portion of your question. If I were you I would try to get a good grasp of some of the more basic passages befor you try to tackle Zech. 14.

8. Rev talks about many going apostate from the church, or a great falling away, right? How can a church that has barely begun, already have loads of people fall away? Since Dee Dee has seemed to pick this one up, I will let her answer.

9. do preterists believe in second coming of Christ? Yes. There is an heretical group that call themselves preterist that do not believe in a future physical second coming of Christ, but orthodox preterist absolutely beleive that Jesus will come again!!!!!!!

As in, ok 70ad the prophecies fulfilled, did he take believers away at that or soem poitn during all that?
No.
And now, He will come again at some time to take the rest? He will come again to take all.

10. If the above is affirmative, He did come during trib round 70ad, who was left to propogate the church? N/A

11. I heard it said many palces, that the preterist view makes more sense of the bible, it beautifully puts it in chronoligcal order or soemthing and reconciles all the wishy washy holes of a futuristic view.
I certainly think so.

Can anyone briefly or not briefly, explain how this is? Like, what were any mysteries about the futuristic understanding and how preterism better explains these, or vise versa? Liek specific scriptures that you were questioning about one or the other?
Briefly? No. Since I became a preterist, scripture has become more of a coherent whole. I will try to think of some specific yet brief examples of passages that just make more sense when seen withing a preteristic framework to post later.

12. a.What is the meaning of putting satan in a pit for 1000 years (literal or not), then re-releasing him for a awhile? b. if this 1k years happened already, is this the time he is rereleased? because obviously, he is about in our time.
That is one I am still working out myself. But not many people put the 1000 years in the past (though some do).

I have like 15 or 20 more questions, but for the sake of anyone's sanity who decides to answer any of these, I will await another time to ask the rest.
Thanks. I suggestion. If you would like more detailed answers on any particular question, start a new thread with just that question.

:sig: :opus:

[Thedonhopeless]

Ok, thank everyone for takign the time to answer my questions, they have helped clarify many things. I am more hopeful now, that even if I have difficulty comign to terms with this issue, that if I persevere and pray and keep on i will eventually come to a greater udnerstaning, also that you can still belive christ to come gives me hope, because either way christ is coming and I knew that was an important part of the hope of a christian.

Saying that, I'd liek to clarify one answer from Faramir:

So, 1. To faramir, you are saying Jesus named mnt of olives specifically as beeing split, because it was identifing specific group of people splitting? I still have reservations of this, because I don't see any other place he refers to thes epeople as mnt of olives, but again I see many where he names mountains in general. That just may be my ignorance though, mnt of olives might represent these peopel as you say. So I am not doubting you, just my mind can't yet grasp it, if you will. does mnt of olives represent jeruselm or these ethnic jews, what draws you to this poitn, I know you name zech and stuff, but why do those verses draw you to that, was there any other verses that made you think mnt of olives was these ethnic jews or jeruselem? Or am i just not understandign zech myself very well.


I thank again all who helpe dme int his regard, by no means do I have a side to choose right now or even a good grasp, but as it was importantly pointed out to me here..I just need to stick to it and perservere, and suffer it. Keep on it and I will if nothing else grow closer to God. That is a good thing =)

The only thing is, I need to balance this out with learning practicle thngs, i was to study of James before all this..I need to get started on that so I can learn to be a better christian and light in the darkness for people. I can see how easily the escatology has just hijacked every aspect of my study, so I have to work on balancing it all out.

Oh and to Dee Dee, if you like, you can start a new thread about the falling away issue, or leave it here. But I look forward to your views in that.

Thanks again all!

[Ted]

DeeDee,

I think it is a valid inference to note in most of the messages to the churches (Rev 2-3) references to various heresies. These are forms of "falling away" (apostasia). While the specific language of 2 Thess 2 does not appear, the core idea does.

Ted

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Saying that, I'd liek to clarify one answer from Faramir:



So, 1. To faramir, you are saying Jesus named mnt of olives specifically as beeing split, because it was identifing specific group of people splitting? I still have reservations of this, because I don't see any other place he refers to thes epeople as mnt of olives, but again I see many where he names mountains in general. That just may be my ignorance though, mnt of olives might represent these peopel as you say. So I am not doubting you, just my mind can't yet grasp it, if you will. does mnt of olives represent jeruselm or these ethnic jews, what draws you to this poitn, I know you name zech and stuff, but why do those verses draw you to that, was there any other verses that made you think mnt of olives was these ethnic jews or jeruselem? Or am i just not understandign zech myself very well.



OK. First, Jesus does not mention the Mount of Olives splitting. This is only in Zechariah, asfaics. So why do I interpret this as a people group in general and the covenant people specifically:



Well, I explained elsewhere that many prophetic passages use mountains as a symbolic representation of peoples, nations, tribes, etc. So I will not go into detail as to why I take that phrase symbolically in Zech. 14. I think your question is why do I equate Mt. Of Olives with the ethnic Jews and their role in the covenant.



You are correct that (at least as far as I know) no other passage makes this comparison. Nor is the passage in Zechariah explicit what, if any symbolic significance should be placed on “the Mount of Olives”. So, you ask a very legitimate question. Why does Faramir make this connection?



The best place to start with scripture interpretation is always the context. Zech. 14 immediately follows Zech. 13. In Zech. 13 we have a prophecy which nearly all agree is in reference to the first advent of Christ. We have predictions of a portion of the Jewish people rejecting Jesus, and a much smaller proportion accepting him. Then Ch. 14 starts out with a description of an army that takes the city of Jerusalem. Elsewhere in the OT we see God allowing foreign armies to destroy Jerusalem as punishment for rebellion. Zech mentions this army in Jerusalem, immediately after he foretells the rejection of the Messiah by a majority of the Jews. Does that necessitate a cause and effect? No, they could be unrelated, but I think at the very least we should consider the possibility that there is some relationship between the two.



Next, I apply the philosophy of letting scripture interpret scripture, and the simpler scripture be used to interpret more complex passages. In Mt. 24 (and Luke 21, Mark 13) Jesus describes the destruction of Jerusalem. It is clear (to me anyway) that this is a prediction of a first century event (and Jerusalem was destroyed in the first Century). It is also significant to note that Jesus made this prediction while standing on the same Mount of Olives mentioned in Zech. 14. I do not think that this was a coincidence, nor do I think it escaped the attention of the Gospel writers because they mentioned the specific place where Jesus made delivered this discourse. I think that a very strong argument can be made that whatever Jesus was talking about in His Olivet Discourse, was related to Zech. 14. And since (IMHO) the Olivet discourse is clearly about the first century destruction of Jerusalem (and the subsequent change in redemptive economy from a Jewish sacrificial system to a Jew/Gentile, Church system), it is reasonable to interpret Zech 14 in that light.



So what “people” group was “spilt” after the destruction of Jerusalem? Well Paul tells us (in 1 Cor. I think) that God has pruned to Olive Tree of the Covenant, and grafted gentiles onto the remnant (the same ‘root’ that John the Baptist alludes to in John as being “cut”). In other words, the covenant that exclusively with the ethnic Jews was broken (by the Jews themselves), the Jews that were faithful to God by following the Messiah, remained and became the root of the new covenant which became open to all (including Jews). The rest were “split off” from the covenant.



This interpretation of Mt. Of O. being the covenant people also fits with my interpretation of the rest of Zech. 14 which parallels my interpretation of the rest of Mt. 24..



I also have a hunch that the Mount of Olives was specifically used due to it’s close proximity to Jerusalem and the Temple which was the center of the Old Covenant worship. But right now that is just a hunch. I need to dig to see if I can find any support for that hunch. (Ain’t studying scripture great? The more you learn, the more you seek for further knowledge).



So to sum up:



1. Mountains, used in prophetic writings are frequently used to represent peoples, groups, etc. There is no reason to think that this is not at the very least a possibility in Zech. 14.

2. Zech. 13 clearly and almost unquestionably predicts the first advent of Christ. Zech. 14 predicts a situation that very closely parallels events that I see as being fulfilled shortly after the first advent based on clearer scripture passages.

3. The clearer passages make specific mention of the very same Mount of Olives that is mentioned in Zech. 14.

4. Interpreting Mt. Of O as the covenant people fits perfectly with my understanding of other, more simpler passages. In other words, if the Mount of O in Zech 14 is symbolic of a people group, the people group that best fits with my understanding of the rest of Zech 14 as well as much of my understanding of the New Testament, is the covenant people of the Old Covenant. This also fits with my understanding of the role of the OT prophet, which is to pronounce covenantal blessing, warning, and judgment on the people of the covenant.



Now I would never use Zech. 14 as a primary proof of preterism. However, I can certainly argue that a strong case can be made that Zech. 14 is compatible with preterism when some people try to use this passage to refute preterism..



I can give even more detail, but I think this will be enough to give you a ball park idea of my rationale for equating Mt. Of Olives in Zech. 14 with the people of the Old Covenant.



However, I strongly suggest that you get an understanding of the easier text (The Olivet Discourse for starters) before you try to tackle Zech. I would love it if you embrace preterism (because I think that it is the correct eschatology). However, of more importance to me is that you 1. Avoid heretical eschatology (full preterism) and 2. study scripture to determine what you think it says, even if you ultimately disagree with me, at least you do so based on your own knowledge of the Word and not what someone else has said.



Please feel free to ask specific questions.

:faramir: :sig: :opus:

[dizzle]

Hey thedon - your best bet is to catch me on paltalk one night cause I have so little forum debate/discussion time.

I asked for the verses because Revelation was not specific in the way your OP suggested. However, the heresies mentioned in the letters to the seven churches were extant then (John wrote it then to historical churches); the book of Hebrews was written to combat at least in part a large segment of Jewish believers teetering on falling away, history records numerous oddball movements during that time, and as far as Thess is concerned, I do not bellieve that is of necessity of religious apostasy but the Jewish revolt against Rome (political falling away is also an apostasia).

[Bill the Cat]

DO NOT LOOK INTO HER EYES!!!!

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

DO NOT LOOK INTO HER EYES!!!!
:lol: :btc:

[Teallaura]

Hi!

I would like to ask some questions, based on numerous explanations from all sides of this particular ring of debate.

So without any further ado, let my questions begin. :smile:

1. Does this topic effect salvation? Meaning, is it vital I choose a side and the RIGHT side, in order to fulfil my belief in God and put my faith in Him?.NO, No, nope, no way, naw, uh-uh, doesn't. Hope that wasn't too vague :wink: ...

2. If not, is it ok to ignore the issue altogether? (heh).I agree with the person who said it's not okay to ignore it from laziness. Conversely, there isn't an entrance exam in Heaven. No one can or will know everything when we get there. Deal with it the best you can - for some of us that will mean deal with it and move on, others will wrestle with these issues for a lifetime. Some just like it!:wink:

3. If we can agree the Holy Spirit gives believers truth, understanding ect of Jesus, why does the Holy Spirit seem to give so many seemingly intelligent and faithful followers conflicting information? If you boil this down to logic, only one group can be right if the Holy Spirit gives insight and understanding..so whoever is right on this, everyone else is not getting this from the Holy Spirit? Thats the logic at hand, and the question..I have my own personal theory on that - I think it is partially to fill the needs of the complex things that God made us. We aren't all alike and we differ so much in thoughts, attitudes and opinions that I suspect it takes the kind of depth and complexity that we find in the Bible to satisfy all the differing spiritual needs. It's not that the Bible is in any way deficient, but that like a multi-course meal it provides richness in taste and texture that is more satisfying ultimately to all than a simple bowl of soup might be.
But the main reason I think we can come to so many different conclusions is to help us learn to rely on the One who gives the answers, and not the answers themselves. It's an easy trap to fall into - getting so insistent that we be able to understand it all with our limited (in my case, extremely limited) human intellect that we lose sight of God in all the stuff. If the answers were all nice and laid out for us, we'd trust the answers rather than God - we'd find the trees and miss out on the forest.


I can't help with the others. Here for the popcorn myself....:wink:

[Thedonhopeless]

to dee dee: I completely understand, but atleast you gave a brief disagreement with the great falling away, so I know a disagreement exsists.

to Faramir: thank you so much! You have explained the Mount of Olives position you take well, I can see, atleast within th elimits of my own knowledge, of how you came to that. I do know of the olive tree ect, so that is a strong arguement. Saying that, I hate to bug you again but I do have another question from what you wrote. This not so much about the Mount of olives anymore, because I can see how you came to that conclusion...and I may possibly agree with that, or it atleast gives me a better understanding of the position when I study these in the bible myself.

This one is on another track, you said in the OT, that God allows the destruction of Jeruselem as punishment for their rebellion. If this is so, wouldn't Jesus be predicting an ultimate destruction of Jeruselem? I mean, you know, if Jeruselem gets in trouble all the time, and in 70 ad is destroyed again, but they once again rebuild, how is that apocolyptic in anyway? It is just another era when Jeruselem is destroyed. I mean, the way Jesus talks, you woudl think it is some final judgement.

In light of your position and arguement, I can see the powerful examples you give, the previous destrutions of jeruselem are strong support here, so this isn't really a question this time against what you say, just a general question of the whole situation.

Lastly, to be 100% sure, you say never to believe in full preterism. I seen this defined many different ways, can you be more specific on the things they believe which are heretical. I know they believe in the 2nd coming at 70 ad as spiritmech pointed out. Is there anymore to beaware of.

And what you say of me comign to my own understanding hits home, sometimes, I admit, I do get a tad lazy and just except the best arguement fort something that is given. You struck a chord close to home, so I thank you greatly for that alone! I must, in the end, find my own understanding form the scripture, with the help of the Holy Spirit.


to teal: when you say, soemtimes we look at the truth of osemthing instead of God, that is a powerful statement. It hit home. Thanks.

to spiritmech: you speak of catholism, for the scope of this thread, I won't go into any of that. But I would like at soem poitn to discuss how you say the pope can make all the desisions of the church.

[Hitch]

Hi!

I would like to ask some questions, based on numerous explanations from all sides of this particular ring of debate.

First, some quick background.

I forever just about, believed the tribulation and prophecies of the olivate discourse, Daniel and revalations and the like were future events. Never have I questioned this position nor anyone question this position of me.

Until I stumbled upon it accidently. It imemdiatley alienated me from my beliefs, and I felt as a cultist would when they leave their cult and see the world in its actual light, dazed, confused and a lil abandoned!

BUt, beeing a seeker of all truths, I didn't panic, so I looked into it, and the fire I walked through was immense! Total confusion!

There seems to be great and effective arguements on most sides and seeing that I wanted to know the absolute truth, and know God and every truth about Him, you can imagine my frustration at all the different sides and points of views which were so eloquently and persuasively expressed.

I have come across many questions, some that I will ask here, in hopes to better come to terms with this subject and to make a better informed choice of what to believe.

I know that alot of these questions are probably answered elsewhere, but please bare with me on this, I beg you. My mind is in pieces from reading what seems hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of different articles, books and threads in this very website.

Right now, what do I believe on this issue? NOTHING. I cannot come to any terms with the situation at all! i don't like to believe false things, so in order to come to terms with this I must know the absolute truth, or atleast a pretty darn good reason to believe what may not be known for sure.

So without any further ado, let my questions begin. :smile:

1. Does this topic effect salvation? Meaning, is it vital I choose a side and the RIGHT side, in order to fulfil my belief in God and put my faith in Him?

2. If not, is it ok to ignore the issue altogether? (heh)

3. If we can agree the Holy Spirit gives believers truth, understanding ect of Jesus, why does the Holy Spirit seem to give so many seemingly intelligent and faithful followers conflicting information? If you boil this down to logic, only one group can be right if the Holy Spirit gives insight and understanding..so whoever is right on this, everyone else is not getting this from the Holy Spirit? Thats the logic at hand, and the question.

4. If the tribulation ect already happened, in 70 a.d, what are we doing now? If God inflicted his judgement, why let the world continue on? Why let thousands of years pass, and the world decompossing year by year?

5. I hear about this 1000 years thing..well whether it is literal or not, does anyone have any proof at all that there is any span of time satan was cast into the pit and didn't influence nations? I mean, without the influence of satan, that would be a pretty peaceful stetch of time, no? And when exactly did the 1k occur, or is it to occur at another time? If it occured after the trib of 70ad, wouldn't there be a span of peace?

6.*edited for redundancy*

7. I read on these forums from..Faramir (sp?), that the mount of olives splitting in two means nations or peoples if I am correct, because there is much language in the bible used to describe nations as mountains ect. Yes, I agree this language is used, but never in such a specific way. Jesus is pretty specific in saying "Mount of Olives" that splits in two..not just mountains or mountain. he is very specific and names it. can anyone reconcile this difference? Because mnt Olives is clearly not split in two.

8. Rev talks about many going apostate from the church, or a great falling away, right? How can a church that has barely begun, already have loads of people fall away?

9. do preterists believe in second coming of Christ? As in, ok 70ad the prophecies fulfilled, did he take believers away at that or soem poitn during all that? And now, He will come again at some time to take the rest?

10. If the above is affirmative, He did come during trib round 70ad, who was left to propogate the church?

11. I heard it said many palces, that the preterist view makes more sense of the bible, it beautifully puts it in chronoligcal order or soemthing and reconciles all the wishy washy holes of a futuristic view. Can anyone briefly or not briefly, explain how this is? Like, what were any mysteries about the futuristic understanding and how preterism better explains these, or vise versa? Liek specific scriptures that you were questioning about one or the other?


12. a.What is the meaning of putting satan in a pit for 1000 years (literal or not), then re-releasing him for a awhile? b. if this 1k years happened already, is this the time he is rereleased? because obviously, he is about in our time.

I have like 15 or 20 more questions, but for the sake of anyone's sanity who decides to answer any of these, I will await another time to ask the rest.You cant get the 'cats' of s-cats- ology back in the bag. The old pr-mil simplicty will never be good enough again. Heh heh

take care

H

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

to Faramir: thank you so much! You have explained the Mount of Olives position you take well, I can see, atleast within th elimits of my own knowledge, of how you came to that. I do know of the olive tree ect, so that is a strong arguement. Saying that, I hate to bug you again but I do have another question from what you wrote. This not so much about the Mount of olives anymore, because I can see how you came to that conclusion...and I may possibly agree with that, or it atleast gives me a better understanding of the position when I study these in the bible myself.

This one is on another track, you said in the OT, that God allows the destruction of Jeruselem as punishment for their rebellion. If this is so, wouldn't Jesus be predicting an ultimate destruction of Jeruselem? I mean, you know, if Jeruselem gets in trouble all the time, and in 70 ad is destroyed again, but they once again rebuild, how is that apocolyptic in anyway? It is just another era when Jeruselem is destroyed. I mean, the way Jesus talks, you woudl think it is some final judgement.I see the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 as final. Not the final destruction of the physical city, obvioiusly, it is still there today. But when you consider that the Bible is a book detailing God and His relation to Covenant people, the destruction of Jerusalem is final in terms of covenental status.

Now that I have gotten you all confused, let me explain to hopefully clarify.

God established His covenant first with Adam, then Noah, Abraham, Moses. The covenant was exclusively with the descendents of Jacob (Israel). The covenant involved sacrifices made to God as an intigral part of worhsip. The covenant also involved a promise of a Messiah. The sacrifices were a forshadowing of the sacrifice to be offerend once for all (Ref. Hebrews) by the Messiah. The covenant also contained penalties and punishments for violating the covenant.

In Daniel and Ezekiel we learn that the Babylonian captivity of the church was the direct result of the promised covenental punishments. Daniel gives 490 years (70 weeks) for the Jews to be returned to the land as a covenental probation period (I know I am creating more questions than answers for you).

To make a long story short (oops, too late) the Jews did not pass probation, they rejected thier Messiah, and received their final judgment when the temple was destroyed, desolving thier exclusive covenental status with God. Final in terms of physical city? No. Final in terms of covenental status? Yes.

Of course not all Jews rebelled. There were some who accepted thier Messiah. These were "True Isreal" (Paul somewhere talks about 'spiritual descendants of Abraham v. physical). These Jews were the 'root of the olive tree' Paul speaks of and the Gentile Christians were grafted into it. (Can't think of the exact reference right now).

In other words. True Israel or True Judaism was practiced in the OT, with the anticipation of the Messiah. When the Messiah came, true Jews accepted the Messiah. I see Christianity not as a seperate religion from 1st century Judaism, but as the true and accurate continuation of Judaism.

There are a lot more details (that took me years to connect) but hopefully this is enough for now.

In light of your position and arguement, I can see the powerful examples you give, the previous destrutions of jeruselem are strong support here, so this isn't really a question this time against what you say, just a general question of the whole situation.

Lastly, to be 100% sure, you say never to believe in full preterism. I seen this defined many different ways, can you be more specific on the things they believe which are heretical. I know they believe in the 2nd coming at 70 ad as spiritmech pointed out. Is there anymore to beaware of.
Full preterist (I prefer hyperpreterist, Dee Dee prefers neohymenaenism) believe that all biblical prophecy has been fulfilled. To them there is no future physical resurrection, not future final judgment, and no future physical return of Christ. Some even go so far as to say that the resurerection of Christ was not physical eitehr. Paul (1 and 2 Timothy) condemed Hymeneaus (sp?) for teaching that the Resurrection is still future.

And what you say of me comign to my own understanding hits home, sometimes, I admit, I do get a tad lazy and just except the best arguement fort something that is given. You struck a chord close to home, so I thank you greatly for that alone! I must, in the end, find my own understanding form the scripture, with the help of the Holy Spirit.Well, there is nothing wrong with accepting the best argument. That is not being lazy. We can't all be professional theologians. My point is to look at all the arguments before you make a decision. I was a futurist for years. I never really understood a lot of what that position teaches, but accepted it as true. When I finally got 'unlazy' I decided to try to understand futurism (note, my intent was not to abandon futurism, but to understand it.) The more I studied the more I realized that the arguments by preterist made much more sense to me than futurism. And once I accepted the 'big picture' of preterism, I studied to answer some of the more detailed questions. I'm still studying, but for me, preterism holds up a lot better to scrutiny than futurism.

There is nothing wrong with accepting the best argument. That is not being lazy that is being smart. However, it is lazy to pick a position and then stop. There is always more depth to be found. But do not resrict this to eschatology either, then you miss out on the depth of other portions of scripture. And of course this process takes time. At the rate I am going I will probably have all the scriptural knowledge I want in about 12,000 years. :grin: But I guess that by then I will have discovered even more stuff in scripture I need to study.

IOW, in addition to the trap of being lazy, there is the danger of being impatient. Study to show thyself approved, but know that there is no end to study.

Hope this helps.

[John Reece]

. . . Paul (1 and 2 Timothy) condemned Hymenaeus (sp?) for teaching that the Resurrection is still future. . . .


Faramir,

I corrected the spelling.

Would you like to correct the statement?

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

. . . Paul (1 and 2 Timothy) condemned Hymenaeus (sp?) for teaching that the Resurrection is still future. . . .
Faramir,

I corrected the spelling.

Would you like to correct the statement?
:doh: . . . Paul (1 and 2 Timothy) condemned Hymenaeus (sp?) for teaching that the Resurrection is still future past. . . .



Not only did I mess that up, I totally missed John's point and my fisrt reesponse to him (that post has been deleted) was most inappropriate due to my misunderstanding. I apologize to anyone who saw it, especially my good friend John Resse if he saw it.

:sig:

[Amazing Rando]

:rofl: How dare that Hymenaues say that the resurrection is still future!

[John Reece]

:doh: . . . Paul (1 and 2 Timothy) condemned Hymenaeus (sp?) for teaching that the Resurrection is still future past. . . .



Not only did I mess that up, I totally missed John's point and my fisrt reesponse to him (that post has been deleted) was most inappropriate due to my misunderstanding. I apologize to anyone who saw it, especially my good friend John Resse if he saw it.


Faramir,

:smile:

I got your first response by e-mail.

:smile:

I enjoy your spelling.

:smile:

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Faramir,

:smile:

I got your first response by e-mail.

:smile:
:blush:

I am so sorry.

I enjoy your spelling.

:smile:
:blush: My spelling is bad (but not that bad) my typing is much worse. :blush:

[Bill the Cat]

See that's the spelling shell game you preterists play...

[John Reece]

:blush:

I am so sorry.


:blush: My spelling is bad (but not that bad) my typing is much worse. :blush:

:smile:

No need to blush, Faramir.

If I did not compose my posts with Word - with the spell-checker and grammar-checker set on “autocorrect” - my posts would have a lot more misspellings and typos than yours.

:smile:

Blessings,

John

[Thedonhopeless]

Faramir, thanks again for the explanation, I certainly can see where you are coming from here. Seeing as God's relationship with people is by far more important then any city, I can understand what you say. Yet again though, you are right this brings even more questions, heh. But so I don't overloa d myself, I want to digest what I have already learned so far, and not go way out to far to quickly. I have a tendancy to release odl information for new, if I do not commit what I have learned already. That is a bad thing :smile:
I sort of have a problem with that, it it magnifies when I tackle different aspects of the word, I need a better system of study and learning, better ways to balance the things I deal with out. any suggestions?

Also, you are talkign to the very worse speller/typo guy in the whoel internet. For the sake of communicating this important issue well, I have typed slowly and precise, so as not to confuse even mroe a confusign issue, but when you friends have to learn a new way of readign comprehension, just to understand my typing, you know it is bad. :blush: Like, they have learned to read the most messed up typos, to the point they decipher: bdro into bored, very quickly.

Ok, well, once again I thank you Faramir and all who have participated. I need to absorb what I have learned, and look at the whoel situation. I am by far at a better point then I was before startign this thread, I owe much to all of you. Then again, I can say i am at a worse poitn cause now I know more to confuse me. lolz

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Faramir, thanks again for the explanation, I certainly can see where you are coming from here. Seeing as God's relationship with people is by far more important then any city, I can understand what you say. Yet again though, you are right this brings even more questions, heh. But so I don't overloa d myself, I want to digest what I have already learned so far, and not go way out to far to quickly. I have a tendancy to release odl information for new, if I do not commit what I have learned already.
No thank you. It charpens my own understanding trying to explain things to someone with "fresh eyes" and an open mind. It is always a pleasure.

That is a bad thing :smile: I sort of have a problem with that, it it magnifies when I tackle different aspects of the word, I need a better system of study and learning, better ways to balance the things I deal with out. any suggestions? Study everything (and then study it again). Digest what you can. Don't get impatient in the process. That is my "system". Not very good I know. But if you can come up with a better one, let me know.

An example of this happened today. In another thread I am discussin Dan. 12 with Bill the Cat (one of the sharpest futurist around). I looked up an article on Dan 12, which I remembered had a so so explanation. I had not read the article in about a year and a half. I read again today, and it made so much more sense. In otherwords. A year and a half later I had digested enough info to get a better grasp on something I had already studied.

(I saw at least one typo of mine but didn't correct since you understand. :wink: )

[Hitch]

Well now I've actually seen a sarcasm tag,,, is wearing a dress required when one is used?

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Well now I've actually seen a sarcasm tag,,, is wearing a dress required when one is used? If it were, you would be using one.

:wink: To use the sarcasme tag just put the text like this:

If it were, you would be using one.

[Hitch]

Hey,,, how about a 'literalism' tag so we can tell when the DFs are practicing the 'literal when ever convenient,,er possible,' system???

[Ted]

Having re-read Faramir's long post, I must second the essence of his comments.

But... I don't see Preterism as the answer. But that's a longer answer in itself...

You've embarked on a long, very fulfilling road. There will be bumps. But keep a notebook. You will find it helps to crystallize your thoughts.

Ted

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Having re-read Faramir's long post, I must second the essence of his comments.

But... I don't see Preterism as the answer. But that's a longer answer in itself...

You've embarked on a long, very fulfilling road. There will be bumps. But keep a notebook. You will find it helps to crystallize your thoughts.

Ted
Thanks Ted. I can also say to thedonhopeless, don't just take my word. Read other opinions. Especially Ted's. Even though I disagree with Ted on a lot of eschatological issues, his ideas are well thought out and should be considered along with all other well thought out interpretations.

Just my :2cents:

[Terral]

Hopeless:
Hopeless >> 1. Does this topic effect salvation? Meaning, is it vital I choose a side and the RIGHT side, in order to fulfil my belief in God and put my faith in Him?
No sir. People are saved by hearing (Rom. 10:17) and believing (Eph. 1:13+14) our gospel (1Cor. 15:3+4) that Christ died for our sins and God raised Him from the dead (Rom. 10:9); and our redemption is through His precious blood. Eph. 1:7.
Hopeless >> 2. If not, is it ok to ignore the issue altogether? (heh)
Yes sir. People who misunderstand the essentials of any topic should avoid teaching unsound doctrine to other members of the body of Christ. It is far better to remain silent than to spread false doctrine.
Hopeless >> 3. If we can agree the Holy Spirit gives believers truth, understanding ect of Jesus, why does the Holy Spirit seem to give so many seemingly intelligent and faithful followers conflicting information? If you boil this down to logic, only one group can be right if the Holy Spirit gives insight and understanding..so whoever is right on this, everyone else is not getting this from the Holy Spirit? Thats the logic at hand, and the question.
You are asking about the differences between the ‘mystery of Christ’ (Eph. 3:4, Col. 4:3) and the ‘mystery of lawlessness’ (2Thes. 2:7) and teachings orchestrated through the ‘deluding influence’ of 2Thes. 2:11. While the body of Christ (Eph. 4:11-13) is being built to maturity through obedience to our gospel, another body of sin is also being built through disobedience to the truth and faith in every form of false gospel imaginable. There are well over 2000 denominations created by men, but only one truth under God. Do the math . . .
Hopeless >> 4. If the tribulation ect already happened, in 70 a.d, what are we doing now? If God inflicted his judgement, why let the world continue on? Why let thousands of years pass, and the world decompossing year by year?
All of the ‘end of the age’ and ‘day of the Lord’ prophecies of Scripture have yet to be fulfilled. Preterism is a counterfeit theology based upon the reasoning of men. They replace the phrase “this generation” (Matt. 24:34) with “your generation” and Pretend that Christ is addressing the people of Peter’s generation living 2000 years ago. Their theology is self defeating, and they have yet to gain the spiritual stature to come to the knowledge of this simple truth. Peter’s generation is the one that gave us our New Testament, and NONE of them mentions one word about the fulfillment of Matthew 24. Where does Peter, John or anybody else say that Christ came on the clouds with His holy ones at the end of the age? NOWHERE! Instead, the Preterists stand with everybody else in the prophecies of Christ in Matthew 24 to read about FUTURE events that have yet to take place. They are deceived and go out deceiving others into believing their nonsense. People with understanding know that Christ is describing ‘day of the Lord’ (Joel 2:31, Acts 2:17-21) events in Matthew 24. Paul says that our mystery church (Eph. 5:32) is ‘caught up’ (1Thes. 4:17) when the day of the Lord is ‘at hand.’ 2Thes. 2:2. We are taken when the day of the Lord BEGINS, while the prophetic ‘bride’ (John 3:29) is gathered (Matt. 24:31) at the very end of ‘the thousand years’ (2Pet. 3:8, Rev. 20:5) ‘day of the Lord’ (2Pet. 3:10). Once you come to realize that our current body of Christ church (1Cor. 1:24) is gathered when the day of the Lord BEGINS, then it becomes easy to see that all of those things of prophecy occur DURING that thousand year period that is still FUTURE.
Hopeless >> 5. I hear about this 1000 years thing..well whether it is literal or not, does anyone have any proof at all that there is any span of time satan was cast into the pit and didn't influence nations? I mean, without the influence of satan, that would be a pretty peaceful stretch of time, no? And when exactly did the 1k occur, or is it to occur at another time? If it occured after the trib of 70ad, wouldn't there be a span of peace?
Preterists here do not want to be bothered with the facts in this case. They Pretend that the kingdom has already started in their own man-made fantasy world that makes no Biblical sense at all. Satan is still the ‘prince of the power of the air’ (Eph. 2:2) and the ‘god of this world’ (2Cor. 4:4) and ‘deluding influence’ (2Thes. 2:11) of the Pauline Epistles that were drafted for the benefit of the ‘body of Christ’ (Eph. 4:12) living in the world today. There has been no fulfillment of Prophecy for the past 2000 years, because we are living inside a created mystery ‘time’ never seen by any of the OT Prophets. They were not given to see our gospel (Rom. 16:25), our mystery church (Eph. 5:32, Col. 1:24-27) or our mystery translation (1Cor. 15:51-53) into immortality. If the rulers of this age had understood God’s hidden wisdom, then they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 2Cor. 2:6-8. Preterists do not understand the differences between the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matt. 4:23, 24:14) and our ‘Christ and Him crucified’ (2Cor. 2:2) gospel for today. They redefine the terms of Scripture in order to prop up their man-made Preterism. You are pointing out some of the inconsistencies of their belief system in asking these questions.
Hopeless >> 7. I read on these forums from..Faramir (sp?), that the mount of olives splitting in two means nations or peoples if I am correct, because there is much language in the bible used to describe nations as mountains ect. Yes, I agree this language is used, but never in such a specific way. Jesus is pretty specific in saying "Mount of Olives" that splits in two..not just mountains or mountain. he is very specific and names it. can anyone reconcile this difference? Because mnt Olives is clearly not split in two.
Again, you are pointing out some of the inconsistencies in the testimony of those who believe in this Preterism. Zechariah is very specific (Zech. 14:3-7) that Christ’s feet will stand upon the Mount of Olives, and that this same mountain where Christ is giving His Olivet Discourse will be split in two (Zech. 14:4). Of course, these prophecies of Zechariah represent a large stumbling block for the Preterists on this Board. Other Preterists gasp in silence as Faramir makes these assertions, because they have no response at all. I honestly believe that most of those professing this Preterism have never considered the prophecies of Zechariah 14, and that Christ could be describing the fulfillment of those things in Matthew 24. Now that their Preterism bed has been made, they are left to sleep in it. They continue to deceive others into believing in their man-made theology even though Scripture is clearly saying something else. They have placed importance upon their interpretation instead of upon the truth, and they deceive through the same teachings in which they were deceived.
Hopeless >> 8. Rev talks about many going apostate from the church, or a great falling away, right? How can a church that has barely begun, already have loads of people fall away?
Christ describes an hour of testing that is coming upon the ‘whole world’ to test those living on the earth (Rev. 3:10), and a third of mankind being killed in Rev. 9:18. All are given the mark of the beast in Rev. 13:16+17 so that nobody can buy or sell, unless they have this mark in their right hand or forehead. Who possessed the authority and technology to fulfill this prophecy in 70 AD? NOBODY. Revelation shows the Lord overcoming the combined armies of all the disobedient nations on earth in a single battle that leaves bodies piled up for a distance of 200 miles outside the city. Rev .14:20. The number of one army was given as ‘two hundred million’ in Rev. 9:16, but the global population did not reach 300 million until 1350 AD. There was not even a battle in 70 AD, as Rome had occupied Israel and the entire region for decades before they decided to level Jerusalem. Israel had no standing army to fight against the Romans, and had no choice but to be scattered among the nations. Instead of returning with His angels to destroy the wicked, the Preterists have Him returning in 70 AD and using Romans to level the Holy City of God. Instead of putting an end to the Roman Empire and setting up His Kingdom, they ignore the fact that the Colosseum was built a decade after Jerusalem was leveled, and that the Empire continued to dominate the region for hundreds of years that follow. Their interpretations do not come close to anything taught in Scripture, but they continue to force their theology on others just the same.
Hopeless >> 9. do preterists believe in second coming of Christ? As in, ok 70ad the prophecies fulfilled, did he take believers away at that or some point during all that? And now, He will come again at some time to take the rest?
Preterism renders the bulk of ‘day of the Lord’ and ‘end of the age’ prophecies impotent, as if those things have already taken place. Note that the Twelve asked Christ about His coming (singular) and the ‘end of the age’ in Matthew 24:3. Christ began to describe the events leading up to His one coming and the singular ‘end of the age’ in His Olivet Discourse in Matt. 24:3-31. Again, there is no Biblical evidence to support the supposition that Christ returned in 70 AD to fulfill any of the ‘day of the Lord’ or ‘end of the age’ prophecies of Scripture. If Scripture contained such information, then the Preterists here would have no need to quote from Matthew 24 where Christ gives a laundry list of events for future fulfillment. They would be quoting from the writers who gave a written account of all of those ‘end of the age’ events taking place, instead of quoting Prophecy like everybody else. For you to believe that Christ came in 70 AD (not), then you are forced to simply take their word for it. Then you are forced into believing that God simply forgot to include the record of all those events in Scripture, as if He forgot how to deliver the mail. They are asking you to believe that the events of Revelation were fulfilled two or three decades before the book of prophecy was ever written. Preterists want you to believe that OT and NT prophecy concerning the ‘end of the age’ was fulfilled hundreds of years before Scripture was canonized into its current form. They transform God’s book of prophecy (Rev. 22:7, 10, etc.) into a history book of events that happened 2000 years ago, even though there is not one shred of Biblical evidence to support their interpretation. They must invent two comings of Christ to fulfill their version of “Your coming” and the “end of the age.” Matt. 24:3.
Hopeless >> 10. If the above is affirmative, He did come during trib round 70ad, who was left to propogate the church?
The problem with their theory is that Christ is coming to judge the living (Matt. 25:31-33) and the dead (Rev. 20:11-15) at His coming and the ‘end of the age.’ This ‘evil age’ (Gal. 1:4) shall continue, until we see Satan (Rev. 20:10) and his cronies (Rev. 19:20, 20:11-15) in the lake of fire. That is when this old heaven and earth (Rev. 20:11) pass away (Matt. 24:35) at the ‘end of the age,’ according to Peter’s descriptions in 2Pet. 3:7-12.
Hopeless >> 11. I heard it said many palces, that the preterist view makes more sense of the bible, it beautifully puts it in chronoligcal order or soemthing and reconciles all the wishy washy holes of a futuristic view. Can anyone briefly or not briefly, explain how this is? Like, what were any mysteries about the futuristic understanding and how preterism better explains these, or vise versa? Liek specific scriptures that you were questioning about one or the other?
Preterism does not make a lick of sense to me, and none of their arguments have persuaded me to adopt their views. Where are the Epistles from the generation living 2000 years ago that describe the fulfillment of prophecy given in Matthew 24:3-31? If the ‘day of the Lord’ has already come (not), then how is it that we are ‘caught up’ (1Thes. 4:17) when the day of the Lord is ‘at hand’ (2Thes. 2:2)? Adopting the Preterist interpretation creates a ton of contradictions in Scripture, and the need to perpetuate even more lies.
Hopeless >> 12. a.What is the meaning of putting satan in a pit for 1000 years (literal or not), then re-releasing him for a awhile? b. if this 1k years happened already, is this the time he is rereleased? because obviously, he is about in our time.
Satan is still free as a bird in this evil age, as he has been since the time of Genesis 1:2. He shall be chained during the coming ‘thousand years’ (2Pet. 3:8) of the ‘day of the Lord’ (2Pet. 3:10). Note that John is standing in the “Lord’s day” in Rev. 1:10. That marks the time that Satan is chained at the sound of the trumpet that sounded off behind him (1Cor. 15:52), where Christ has the voice of the archangel (1Thes. 4:16). Christ shall pronounce the railing judgment against Satan at the moment He comes to gather the members of His ‘body of Christ.’ This is a contrast to when the body of Moses was gathered shortly after Calvary. Jude 1:9. The ‘thousand years’ are then fulfilled in the visions of John in Rev. 1:11-20:15, and Satan is loosed (Rev. 20:7) at the very end (Rev. 12:12) of that thousand years which is still very much FUTURE.
Hopeless >> I have like 15 or 20 more questions, but for the sake of anyone's sanity who decides to answer any of these, I will await another time to ask the rest.
First of all you should realize that Preterists run this Board, which creates the environment for them to present their various forms of Preterism. I started a thread asking similar questions in this same room, and they all squawked like chickens, until the powers that be deleted my thread. They appear to be less threatened by your questions for some reason. On the one hand Preterists (and even you) can ask all the questions they wish, but I am limited to asking one or two in my OP’s. They have one set of rules for Terral, and another set for everybody else; which is why I do not start any new threads on this site. At some point we are left to stand with God in the knowledge that they will all be judged for the injustices and false teachings they perpetuate upon others. 2Thes. 2:10-12.


In Christ,

Terral

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

st of all you should realize that Preterists run this Board, which creates the environment for them to present their various forms of Preterism. I started a thread asking similar questions in this same room, and they all squawked like chickens, until the powers that be deleted my thread.

Unlike Terral, I am not very quick to call my fellow Christian (or even non-Christian) a liar. Howver, the above statement by Terral is an out right lie. The thread in question was closed by Bill the Cat, a Dispensational futurist. It was closed with Terral's agreement. Yet Terral conveniently leaves that part out.

If you did not want that thread deleted, just say the word. It can always be re-opened because it was not fully deleted. All of it can be re-opened, including the part where Terral said, "Go ahead and close the thread....".

I am fully prepared to back up this accusation in the proper forum, The Locker Room, in this thread. (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?p=911960#post911960) But I am willing to give Terral the opportunity to retract his statement first.

Also, Terral should know that complaining about moderation in any forum other than the Locker Room is against decorum. :shame:

They appear to be less threatened by your questions for some reason. On the one hand Preterists (and even you) can ask all the questions they wish, but I am limited to asking one or two in my OP’s. They have one set of rules for Terral, and another set for everybody else; which is why I do not start any new threads on this site.
Once again Terral Compares Apples to Oranges. Terral's questions were very specific in nature and related to several very specific and seperate topics and were clearly meant for debate. Donthehopeless asked very general questions of a non-debate nature.
Terral can't seem to grasp this simple concept.

[Bill the Cat]

First of all you should realize that Preterists run this Board, which creates the environment for them to present their various forms of Preterism. I started a thread asking similar questions in this same room, and they all squawked like chickens, until the powers that be deleted my thread.

Actually, you and I mutually agreed that it was in the best interest of the board as a whole that the thread be deleted. I still have that PM.

They appear to be less threatened by your questions for some reason.

Despite your rant, you do have a point, despite Faramir's objection IMO. We may have to tighten up the details of the decorum for Eschatology. I will PM the thread starter and inform him that only one or two questions at a time are permissable. Please, from now on, just hit the report button instead of posting in the thread. It helps us all out.

[Terral]

Cat:
Cat >> Despite your rant, you do have a point, despite Faramir's objection IMO. We may have to tighten up the details of the decorum for Eschatology. I will PM the thread starter and inform him that only one or two questions at a time are permissable. Please, from now on, just hit the report button instead of posting in the thread. It helps us all out.
No sir. Reporting someone for asking questions is beyond ridiculous. Other Preterist OP’s here have many more questions than this one and nobody cares one way or the other. Any ‘response’ to an OP should be limited to a few points in the interest of clarity for the third party readers. Your duty is to Moderate the discussion and not to Dictate the content of OP’s by the registered members. If the opening post is presented within the maximum number of characters and contains no vulgarity or offensive language, then you should remain in the neutral corner of the debate. This place already reeks of favoritism towards the Preterists enough to make one sick to his stomach. Let’s try not to make things even worse. Otherwise this Board shall become a site where Preterists come to agree on everything pertaining to their errant interpretations. If your explanations are threatened by questions and serious scrutiny of debate, then change your views . . .

In Christ,

Terral

First, you are not allowed to take issue with leadership in a debate thread, take it to the Locker Room.

Second, Bill is a futurist, so your accusations of a Preterist Conspiracy involving him are stupid.

Third, DDW and Boom are both Preterists, to some extent, but $Cirisme is not, nor are any of the Administrators, and the Admins are the ones who deal with board issues (along with DDW). This means leadership is top-heavy with non-Preterists.

Fourth, if you have an issue with someone else's OP, you need to report it. We do not in fact read every single post, and if we post in a thread we rarely ever do moderation in that thread (the exceptions are for double posts, cussing, etc. - blatant Decorum violations).