The "End of the Age" [Archive] - TheologyWeb Campus

View Full Version : The "End of the Age"

Mickey

June 17th 2006, 02:16 PM

Dee Dee says:

"The Jews were awaiting the Messianic age. Their time was divided into two great ages, the age of Torah (or Moses) and the Age of Messiah…. The disciples recognized that the destruction of the Temple would bring to an end one age and usher in the other."

Post #39 http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3160&page=3&pp=15 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3160&page=3&pp=15)

Although this was written several years ago Dee Dee says that "the basic idea remains substantially the same".

So before the Lord Jesus was resurrected and ascended into heaven the "age" in which He lived while He walked the earth was the "age of Torah".

Therefore,when the Lord Jesus spoke of the "end of the age" He was speaking about the end of the "age of Torah".

So let us see what the Lord Jesus said would happen at the "end of the age" of Torah.In His parable of "the Tares of the Field" He makes it plain that at the end of that age there would be a world wide judgment.

"He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;

38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

39The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels.

40As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age.

41The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;

42And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

43Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt.13:37-43).

According to the Lord Jesus Himself at the end of the "age of Torah" there would be a world wide judment.He said that the field that would be harvested is "the world".The word "world" is translated from the Greek word "kosmos",and it means "the inhabitants of the world;particularly the inhabitants of the earth,men,the human race…Mt. Xiii.38" ("Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon").

Therefore,if words have any meaning then before the "age of Torah" could end and the "age of Messiah" could begin first there must be a world wide judgment.

But despite this Dee Dee says that the Kingdom,the "Age of Messiah",began when the Lord ascended into heaven.How could the "age of Torah" end and the "age of Messiah" be ushered in before this world wide judgment came upon the world?

In Christ,
Mickey

Ted

June 17th 2006, 10:58 PM

How could the "age of Torah" end and the "age of Messiah" be ushered in before this world wide judgment came upon the world?
It can't. But I suspect that the basic problem had to do with the difference between the oral traditions (Oral Torah, which became the Mishnah) and scripture.

Jesus was always grounded in scripture and never allowed himself to be swayed otherwise. The cognescenti of his day relied on the oral traditions which in many ways were in conflict with scripture. Thus, while the oral traditions help us understand the situation and provide interpretive help at times, they cannot be allowed to override scripture.

As a result, the question presupposes things that aren't true. That is, the "age to come" was one thing in Jesus' teaching, while the "age of Messiah" was a product of oral tradition and misunderstanding of the Messianic prophecies.

Ted

Mickey

June 18th 2006, 02:17 AM

As a result, the question presupposes things that aren't true. That is, the "age to come" was one thing in Jesus' teaching, while the "age of Messiah" was a product of oral tradition and misunderstanding of the Messianic prophecies.

Ted
OK,Ted.

Take that up with Dee Dee.

What I am saying is that the "age to come" has not yet come in because there has not yet been a world-wide judgment.

In Christ,
Mickey

Jezz

June 18th 2006, 03:13 AM

Dee Dee says:

"The Jews were awaiting the Messianic age. Their time was divided into two great ages, the age of Torah (or Moses) and the Age of Messiah…. The disciples recognized that the destruction of the Temple would bring to an end one age and usher in the other."

Post #39 http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3160&page=3&pp=15 (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3160&page=3&pp=15)

[size=2]Although this was written several years ago Dee Dee says that "the basic idea remains substantially the same".

So before the Lord Jesus was resurrected and ascended into heaven the "age" in which He lived while He walked the earth was the "age of Torah".

Therefore,when the Lord Jesus spoke of the "end of the age" He was speaking about the end of the "age of Torah".

So let us see what the Lord Jesus said would happen at the "end of the age" of Torah.In His parable of "the Tares of the Field" He makes it plain that at the end of that age there would be a world wide judgment.

"He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;

38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

39The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels.

40As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age.

41The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;

42And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

43Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt.13:37-43).

According to the Lord Jesus Himself at the end of the "age of Torah" there would be a world wide judment.He said that the field that would be harvested is "the world".The word "world" is translated from the Greek word "kosmos",and it means "the inhabitants of the world;particularly the inhabitants of the earth,men,the human race…Mt. Xiii.38" ("Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon").

Therefore,if words have any meaning then before the "age of Torah" could end and the "age of Messiah" could begin first there must be a world wide judgment.

But despite this Dee Dee says that the Kingdom,the "Age of Messiah",began when the Lord ascended into heaven.How could the "age of Torah" end and the "age of Messiah" be ushered in before this world wide judgment came upon the world?
Mickey,

Do you think that God could only judge the world once? Do you believe that there could only ever be one world-wide judgment? Or do you think that God might judge the world many times between now and the final judgement? Indeed, what need would there be to call it "the final judgement" if it were the only one?

dizzle

June 18th 2006, 10:13 AM

OK,Ted.

Take that up with Dee Dee.

What I am saying is that the "age to come" has not yet come in because there has not yet been a world-wide judgment.

In Christ,
Mickey

Mickey I will not be participating in this thread, just an FYI. I simply will not even fool myself into thinking I have the time though I do appreciate your improved attitude, especially if it lasts. I am right now fooling myself into thinking that at some point I may be able to address your last question in the other thread (if indeed the improved tone lasts).

I did want to offer one point of clarification to the readers, as I have been reading and studying, I would agree with those that say the age to come is both here and not yet here, in the now/not yet tension of Scripture. Or in the language of eschatological commentators, the age to come "has burst into this present age" and is being enjoyed inchoate by Christians. My earlier comment from 1992 which Mickey is quoting (and likely appears very similarly in my current work) does not contain that nuance.

And Mickey I do ask for readers that when you quote me, that you link or give the title where you found the quote as you did above, and thank you. However, I did tell you that I have a more recent work on this subject which you should be using rather than a 2002 link. I gave you the link for that, and even though the wordng is likiely very similar the readers can get my complete thoughts, not just what could fit into a word-counted debate. You could pull up that fuller work and search for "age" or "age to come" and find that corresponding quote quite easily. Although yes the basic idea remains the same, the context of the quote will have additional information in the fuller piece and have fuller information on my entire position.

Unless you are desiring to advertise for that particular thread or forum, your unwillingness to use the most recent material isn't very understandable. I ask again that you refer to the most recent and its surrounding context.

Mickey

June 18th 2006, 01:43 PM

Mickey I will not be participating in this thread, just an FYI. Dee Dee,for some reason that does not surprise me in the least.

It is clear that a world wide judgment has not yet occured,so it is equally clear that the "Age of Messiah" has not yet been ushered in,despite your claims to the contrary.

But you say that the "age to come" is "both here and not yet here"!:
I would agree with those that say the age to come is both here and not yet here, in the now/not yet tension of Scripture.
Now I heard it all.Dee Dee is following the "incoherent" ideas put forth by those who call themselves "Progressive Dispensationalists" (in actuality they are "Regressive Dispensationalists").

We are supposed to believe that some events foretold in the Scriptures have not yet happened but at the same time they have happened!

Take your choice--you can't be wrong no matter which option you choose!

In Christ,
Mickey

dizzle

June 18th 2006, 01:57 PM

So much for your improved attitude - that was apparently too much to ask for. That's too bad. And the ideas are not exclusively those of progressive dispensationalists, they are from amillennialist authors (and preterist author N.T. Wright - though Wright doesn't call himself a preterist), and a denial of a future millennium is not compatible with dispensationalism. That being said, even a broken clock is right twice a day, and if progressive dispensationalism has that point right, good for them. Too bad they don't think through their way out of dispensational entirely.

Mickey

June 18th 2006, 02:35 PM

And the ideas are not exclusively those of progressive dispensationalists, they are from amillennialist authors (and preterist author N.T. Wright - though Wright doesn't call himself a preterist), and a denial of a future millennium is not compatible with dispensationalism.
So?

That only proves that some people would rather cling to the eschatology invented by men rather than to believe the eschatoloy presented in the Scriptures.

They are so desperate to cling to their false eschatology that they must make up an idea that says that some things prophesied in the Scriptures are already here--but not yet!
That being said, even a broken clock is right twice a day, and if progressive dispensationalism has that point right, good for them. Too bad they don't think through their way out of dispensational entirely.
They have already "thought their way out of dispensationalism entirely" despite the fact that they call themselves "dispensationalists".

We are to "reason out of the Scriptures" (Acts 17:2),and the idea that some prophesied events are "already fulfilled but not yet" is an abnegation of reason.

And you are able to throw your reason to the wind so that you can explain that some of the events in your false eschatology are "already here,but not yet"!

In Christ,
Mickey

dizzle

June 18th 2006, 02:44 PM

Good day Mickey, perhaps see you on the other thread. Life is too short to deal with unpleasant individuals.

Mickey

June 18th 2006, 03:36 PM

Good day Mickey, perhaps see you on the other thread. Life is too short to deal with unpleasant individuals.
Dee Dee,sometimes the truth hurts.But you shouldn't attack the messenger because the message is unpleasant!

In Christ,
Mickey

Dr. Jack Bauer

June 19th 2006, 07:45 AM

Non premillennial readers of the Bible have affirmed for some time now that the End of the Age is "already and not yet." It can be variously referred to, I'm inclined to call it an overlap of the ages, from Christ's first advent to His second advent.

Familiarity with this trend in biblical exegesis would have saved the thread starter some embarrassment.

Mickey

June 19th 2006, 12:49 PM

Non premillennial readers of the Bible have affirmed for some time now that the End of the Age is "already and not yet."
Hi Theonomy,

It matters little what some theologians may dream up if it does not match what the Scriptures reveal.
It can be variously referred to, I'm inclined to call it an overlap of the ages, from Christ's first advent to His second advent.
I can see no Scriptual evidence that one "age" overlapped another.
Familiarity with this trend in biblical exegesis would have saved the thread starter some embarrassment.
All I have seen from you is your "assertions" in regard to what some men may believe about the Scriptures.

Why did you not quote any Scripture to back up your assertions?

And I would say that if anyone should be embarrassed it is those who can only defend their teachings by saying that some events have already happened,but at the same time those same events remain in the future.

The Lord is not a God of confusion,but if these people are correct in their imagined "already/not yet" theology then God must be the author of confusion.

In Christ,
Mickey

Mickey

December 11th 2007, 05:12 PM

gooner

December 11th 2007, 06:59 PM

Mickey

December 11th 2007, 07:39 PM

wow what a mind. Hey Mikey ...please will you be my pastor, Im in awe of your delivery.
gooner,

The name is not "Mikey" but instead "Mickey."

Of course you added nothing of value to the discussion in regard to this subject. As I said, no preterists have been able to give a reasonable answer to the verses that demonstrate that the events that will occur at the "end of the age" involve a world wide judgment.

They just close their eyes to the truth that the events of the "end of the age" have not yet happened and are somehow able to delude their minds into believing that they have.

Your post is just more evidence of what I say. You don't have anything intelligent to say on the subject.

gooner

December 11th 2007, 08:08 PM

gooner,

The name is not "Mikey" but instead "Mickey."

Of course you added nothing of value to the discussion in regard to this subject. As I said, no preterists have been able to give a reasonable answer to the verses that demonstrate that the events that will occur at the "end of the age" involve a world wide judgment.

They just close their eyes to the truth that the events of the "end of the age" have not yet happened and are somehow able to delude their minds into believing that they have.

Your post is just more evidence of what I say. You don't have anything intelligent to say on the subject.

I'd still like to carry your Bible though. I saw Benny Hinn once on TV and I think one of his guys was carrying his big (it was BIG) Bible. I'd just love to be at one of your preaching engagements so I could carry your Bible Mickey......did I get it right Mickey....I ve been closing my eyes for so long Mick....sorry Mickey ...but you are the one who is opening them ...I can see the truth so much more clearly Mick when you expound. I think your reply is evidence of your deep spirituality Mick. I think you're patient endurance wrt those Preterists, its...well....

Awesome....truly awesome :sigh:

The Logos

December 11th 2007, 08:44 PM

Finally,someone who sees the error known as preterism. I was beginning to think that everyone here believed in that unbiblical view.

Mickey

December 11th 2007, 09:39 PM

I can see the truth so much more clearly Mick when you expound.
That is encouraging, gooner. Here is some more evidence from the Scriptures that demonstrate that the events of which the Lord Jesus speaks at Matthew 24 are in regard to a world wide judgment.

At the coming of the Lord Jesus there will a distress of "nations" because the people in those nations will be fearful of the things coming upon the earth:

"And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory" (Lk. 21: 25-27).

The "nations" will be in distress because they are anticipating a judgment coming on the earth.

These verses are not just about the "nation" of Israel as the preterists imagine. Perhaps you will be the exception and your eyes will indeed be opened to this truth.

rhutchin

December 11th 2007, 10:47 PM

Mickey

December 12th 2007, 01:49 AM

--we might conclude that the current age runs to the end of this world and the next age will be that of eternal life with the new heavens and new earth.
rhutchin,

If you are correct then there would only be "one" age to come but Paul speaks of the "ages to come," (Eph.2:7) which would have to include more than only one age to come.

In His grace,
Jerry

gooner

December 12th 2007, 07:17 AM

Perhaps you will be the exception and your eyes will indeed be opened to this truth.

your prayers and intercessions would be most appreciated

rhutchin

December 12th 2007, 08:40 AM

rhutchin
--we might conclude that the current age runs to the end of this world and the next age will be that of eternal life with the new heavens and new earth.

Mickey
If you are correct then there would only be "one" age to come but Paul speaks of the "ages to come," (Eph.2:7) which would have to include more than only one age to come.

The plurality in Paul's use does not negate the unique manner in which Christ spoke of this present age and the age to come. It also does not lead to a conclusion that the Scriptures support the Jewish distinction of an age of Torah and an age of Messiah.

In Paul's writings we find--

Ephesians 2:7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.

Ephesians 3:5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets:

Ephesians 3:9 and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;

--in which Paul appears to use the term, "ages," where another might use "eras" to distinguish periods of time in history.

Paul follows the example of Christ here--

19 ...according to the working of His mighty power
20 which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places,
21 far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come.

Context suggests that Paul is speaking of two different concepts when he speaks of the age to come in 1:21 and the ages future and past in 2:7; 3:5; 3:9.

TyRockwell

December 12th 2007, 09:59 AM

As anyone can see, not one preterist has been able to come up with a reasonable explanation as to why anyone should believe that the events that will happen at the "end of the age" will not be in regard to a world-wide judgment.

At Matthew 24the Lord's answer was in answer to the question as what will happen at the "end of the age" and since no world-wide judgment has yet occured then it is obvious that the events described by the Lord Jesus at Matthew 24have not yet been fulfilled.

In His grace,
Mickey

I half-way agree with you, maybe two-thirds agree, Mickey. Obviously the ideas of the Torah toters are way off, because they don't believe Messiah came.

I also differ with preterists on Matthew 24. That said, the idea that there was an end of an age is sometimes misunderstood because there were two ends of two ages, when prophecies are understood. Hebrews said that now Jesus has appeared "now, at the end of the ages,...to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." Hebrews 9:26, see also 1st Cor. 2:7 and Eph. 3:5.

Daniel revealed and 'end' of the age of the law, fulfilled in 70 AD in the destruction of the Temple. Daniel 9 :27. Dispensationalists usually don't see what Daniel saw as the end of the temple already past. They think the temple has to be rebuilt, again, in order to be torn down, again, by an 'antichrist. It already happened. Another mystery is the age of the Holy Spirit, though the dispensationalists call it the 'church age.' The people of the word, the torah, or law didn't see, and many Christians don't see the end of the age at Jesus' time was at the end of TWO AGES. They don't see the plural 'ages' in N.T. scripture, noted above.

The first age was before the law. The second age was Law, or Word, who is Jesus, the Messiah, the end of the law. Now the age is that of the Holy Spirit, of which the 'end' is still to come. Where preterists have it wrong is to insist that the end at 70AD was the last end, and they deny the future millineum. Of course much more detail could be added, but the post would be too long.

Ty

Mickey

December 12th 2007, 12:24 PM

Context suggests that Paul is speaking of two different concepts when he speaks of the age to come in 1:21 and the ages future and past in 2:7; 3:5; 3:9.
The Jews were all looking for a "kingdom" age.

Then after the 1000 year kingdom age ends then there will be the eternal state, another age.

Mickey

December 12th 2007, 12:31 PM

[quote=TyRockwell;2164858] Dispensationalists usually don't see what Daniel saw as the end of the temple already past. They think the temple has to be rebuilt, again, in order to be torn down, again, by an 'antichrist. It already happened.[quote]
TyRockwell,

The reason that dispensationalists believe that a new Temple will be rebuilt is based on the Scriptures:

"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple…And He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years" (Mal. 3: 1,3,4).

At the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD there was never an occasion when the "offering of Judah and Jerusalem" was pleasant unto the Lord "as in the days of old, and as in former years".

Therefore these verses must be in reference to a time still future.

In His grace,
Mickey

rhutchin

December 12th 2007, 02:17 PM

rhutchin
Context suggests that Paul is speaking of two different concepts when he speaks of the age to come in 1:21 and the ages future and past in 2:7; 3:5; 3:9.

Mickey
The Jews were all looking for a "kingdom" age.

Then after the 1000 year kingdom age ends then there will be the eternal state, another age.

The Jews were notable for their ability to misunderstand the Scriptures (OT). Jesus was continually correcting them on one point of misunderstanding after another. It appears that He has done so with respect to this age and the age to come.

Are you arguing that Jewish philosophy should be used to interpret the Scriptures?

rhutchin

December 12th 2007, 02:25 PM

The reason that dispensationalists believe that a new Temple will be rebuilt is based on the Scriptures:

"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple…And He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years" (Mal. 3: 1,3,4).

At the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD there was never an occasion when the "offering of Judah and Jerusalem" was pleasant unto the Lord "as in the days of old, and as in former years".

Therefore these verses must be in reference to a time still future.

Given what we are told in Hebrews, as for example,--

Hebrews 10
11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God,...

From this, we can conclude that animal sacrifices have been reduced to a pagan rite practiced by pagans. If the Jews offered animal sacrifices, it would demonstrate their continuing rejection of Christ as the offering for sin made on their behalf by God.

Malachi can only refer to something that happened as a consequence of the cross. That which is pleasing to God after the cross is the presentation of one's body as a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is one's reasonable service.

Mickey

December 12th 2007, 02:43 PM

The Jews were notable for their ability to misunderstand the Scriptures (OT). Jesus was continually correcting them on one point of misunderstanding after another. It appears that He has done so with respect to this age and the age to come.

Are you arguing that Jewish philosophy should be used to interpret the Scriptures?
No, I am using common sense and the Scriptures in my argument that the Jews were expecting a kingdom age. Here we see the Lord speaking about that age:

"...but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage" (Lk.20:35; NASB).

The Twelve Apostles will indeed be resurrected from the dead when they sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel, and that age will be the kingdom age:

"And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel" (Lk.22:29-30).

In His grace,
Mickey

Mickey

December 12th 2007, 02:54 PM

Malachi can only refer to something that happened as a consequence of the cross. That which is pleasing to God after the cross is the presentation of one's body as a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is one's reasonable service.
No, the verse which you quote here is not in regatd to those of the tribe of Levi:

Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple…And He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years" (Mal. 3 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Mal.+3): 1,3,4).

rhutchin

December 12th 2007, 03:14 PM

rhutchin
The Jews were notable for their ability to misunderstand the Scriptures (OT). Jesus was continually correcting them on one point of misunderstanding after another. It appears that He has done so with respect to this age and the age to come.

Are you arguing that Jewish philosophy should be used to interpret the Scriptures?

Mickey
No, I am using common sense and the Scriptures in my argument that the Jews were expecting a kingdom age. Here we see the Lord speaking about that age:

"...but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage" (Lk.20:35; NASB).

The Twelve Apostles will indeed be resurrected from the dead when they sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel, and that age will be the kingdom age:

"And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel" (Lk.22:29-30).

OK. Would that not this be the "age to come" to which Jesus referred in the earlier citations from Matthew 12 and Mark 10?

Are you saying that the Jews were expecting a kingdom age and then agreeing with me that Jesus is, in the passages cited, correcting their thinking on what the kingdom age (i.e., the age to come) is all about?

The apostles will be resurrected from the dead per 1 Thessalonians 4 along with all believers and thus we shall always be with the Lord.

rhutchin

December 12th 2007, 03:21 PM

rhutchin
Malachi can only refer to something that happened as a consequence of the cross. That which is pleasing to God after the cross is the presentation of one's body as a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is one's reasonable service.

Mickey
No, the verse which you quote here is not in regard to those of the tribe of Levi:

Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple…And He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years" (Mal. 3 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Mal.+3): 1,3,4).

OK. I misread your earlier message and thought that you were agreeing with the dispensationalists that a new temple must be built in the future rather than just describing that view.

Mickey

December 12th 2007, 04:13 PM

OK. I misread your earlier message and thought that you were agreeing with the dispensationalists that a new temple must be built in the future rather than just describing that view.
I do agree with the idea that a Temple will be buit in the future.

"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple…And He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years" (Mal. 3: 1,3,4).

At the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD there was never an occasion when the "offering of Judah and Jerusalem" was pleasant unto the Lord "as in the days of old, and as in former years".

Therefore these verses must be in reference to a time still future, and at that time there will be a rebuilt Temple.

Mickey

December 12th 2007, 04:21 PM

OK. Would that not this be the "age to come" to which Jesus referred in the earlier citations from Matthew 12 and Mark 10?]
Yes, this would be the kingdom age.

However, after the kingdom comes to a close after the 1000 years have ended there will be another age, and that will be the eternal state.
Are you saying that the Jews were expecting a kingdom age and then agreeing with me that Jesus is, in the passages cited, correcting their thinking on what the kingdom age (i.e., the age to come) is all about?
I think that the Jews were expecting the kingdom to be restored to Israel but they did not know exactly when that would happen.
The apostles will be resurrected from the dead per 1 Thessalonians 4 along with all believers and thus we shall always be with the Lord.
The verses from 1 Thess. 4 are in regard to the "catching up" of the saints, both dead and alive.

The resurrection of the just will not involve any living believers being changed so 1 Thess. 4 is not speaking about that resurrection.

TyRockwell

December 12th 2007, 05:24 PM

At the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD there was never an occasion when the "offering of Judah and Jerusalem" was pleasant unto the Lord "as in the days of old, and as in former years".

Therefore these verses must be in reference to a time still future.

According to Paul, in Romans, the true Jew (Judah) is one "with the circumcision of the heart," that is Christians.

According to Hebrews 12:22-23, the Church is "Mount Zion, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect."

Our offering IS pleasant to the Lord, therefore it is not a future temple, we are the temple of the Holy Spirit.

dizzle

December 12th 2007, 05:40 PM

This is scary, Ty and I are in agreement on many things in this thread.

Mickey

December 12th 2007, 06:52 PM

According to Paul, in Romans, the true Jew (Judah) is one "with the circumcision of the heart," that is Christians.
No, by the context we can understand that Paul is not speaking about the Christian when he uses the word "Jew":

"But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?" (Ro.2:29; 3:1-3).

Paul is saying that the true Jew is a person who is a Jew according to the flesh and also has a circumcision of the heart.
According to Hebrews 12:22-23, the Church is "Mount Zion, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect."

Our offering IS pleasant to the Lord, therefore it is not a future temple, we are the temple of the Holy Spirit.
The verses which I quoted are speaking about an actual Temple where the Jewish priests, those from the tribe of Levi, make offerings in that Temple:

"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple…And He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years" (Mal. 3: 1,3,4).

In His grace,
Mickey

gooner

December 12th 2007, 06:56 PM

This is scary, Ty and I are in agreement on many things in this thread.

:popcorn:

this is going to be fun.

rhutchin

December 13th 2007, 07:36 AM

rhutchin
OK. Would that not this be the "age to come" to which Jesus referred in the earlier citations from Matthew 12and Mark 10?

Mickey
Yes, this would be the kingdom age.

However, after the kingdom comes to a close after the 1000 years have ended there will be another age, and that will be the eternal state.

I read Mark 10:30 to say that the "age to come" will be the eternal state. Do you read it differently?

rhutchin
Are you saying that the Jews were expecting a kingdom age and then agreeing with me that Jesus is, in the passages cited, correcting their thinking on what the kingdom age (i.e., the age to come) is all about?

Mickey
I think that the Jews were expecting the kingdom to be restored to Israel but they did not know exactly when that would happen.

Do you think that the Jews (in expecting the kingdom to be restored to Israel) were correct in their understanding of the Scriptures? Or would you agree with me that Jesus had to correct them even on this point?

rhutchin
The apostles will be resurrected from the dead per 1 Thessalonians 4, along with all believers and thus we shall always be with the Lord.

Mickey
The verses from 1 Thess. 4, are in regard to the "catching up" of the saints, both dead and alive.

The resurrection of the just will not involve any living believers being changed so 1 Thess. 4, is not speaking about that resurrection.

??? What is the difference that you make between the "just" and the "saints." Once the "saints, both dead and alive," are caught up, who do you see being left who could be labeled, "just"?

TyRockwell

December 13th 2007, 11:19 AM

"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple…And He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years" (Mal. 3: 1,3,4).

Mickey, you forget that there was a change in the priesthood.
Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood...what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron?
For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law....For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah, of which the tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood.

Then Peter records: "But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him (that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years" Mal. 3: 1,3,4) who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.

Consequently, we as kings and priests, and as the city of Jerusalem, the church on Mount Zion, offer the sacrifice of praise that is pleasant unto the Lord. That is why there is no need for a rebuilt temple. Jesus was the refiner in that He corrected the errors of the Levitical priests and then he made us priests.

Mickey

December 13th 2007, 12:41 PM

Mickey, you forget that there was a change in the priesthood.
Ty, I did not forget. Just because there was a change of the priesthood does not mean that it cannot be changed again.

Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me:and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple…And He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years" (Mal. 3 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Mal.+3): 1,3,4).

Here we can see that the words at Mal. 3 are SPECIFICALLY speaking about "the sons of Levi" and the "offering of Judah and Jerusalem."

It was the sons of Levi who were given the responsibilities in regard to the tabernacle and later the Temple:

"This is the sum of the tabernacle, even of the tabernacle of testimony, as it was counted, according to the commandment of Moses, for the service of the Levites, by the hand of Ithamar, son to Aaron the priest" (Ex.38:21).

If the verses from Malachi were in regard to the "royal priesthood" of which Peter speaks then those verses would not specify the "sons of Levi" and would not specifically speak of the "offering of Judah and Jerusalem."

After the present dispensation comes to a close then the Temple will be rebuilt, as evidenced by the words of the Lord Jesus at Matthew 24:15.

But some will say that that verse has already been fulfilled. Which brings us back to the subject of the topic of this thread, a subject that no one wants to address.

The Lord Jesus' words at Matthew 24 were in answer to the question as to what will be the signs of the "end of the age" (Mt.24:3).?

According to the Lord Jesus words earlier at the "end of the age" there will be a world wide judgment upon the earth:

"He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).

Here we can see that the Lord Jesus speaks of a harvest that will happen at the "end of the age", the "end of this age". He also makes it clear that the harvest will take place in the field, and He says that the "field is the world"

In His grace,
Mickey

rhutchin

December 13th 2007, 03:58 PM

...
After the present dispensation comes to a close then the Temple will be rebuilt, as evidenced by the words of the Lord Jesus at Matthew 24:15.

Matthew 24:15 refers to the "Holy Place." We should not assume that this is the temple in Jerusalem. God has already built a new temple.

16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?

This theme is repeated throughout the NT

Chief of Staff Lizard

December 13th 2007, 04:09 PM

As anyone can see, not one preterist has been able to come up with a reasonable explanation as to why anyone should believe that the events that will happen at the "end of the age" will not be in regard to a world-wide judgment.
As anyone can see, not one preterist has said that the events that will happen at the "end of the age" will not be in regard to a world-wide judgment.

However, Jezz ask several questions:Do you think that God could only judge the world once? Do you believe that there could only ever be one world-wide judgment? Or do you think that God might judge the world many times between now and the final judgement? Indeed, what need would there be to call it "the final judgement" if it were the only one?

So basically, you are claiming victory, by declaring that preterist failed to refute a position they don't even take?

And you don't even answer the questions directly related to this straw man conflagration that you have concocted. :burnsm:

I have two task I would like for you to do Mickey:

1. Show me any quote from a preterist that says that the "end of the age" does not involve a world wide judgment.

2. Answer Jezz's questions:

A. Do you think that God could only judge the world once?
B. Do you believe that there could only ever be one world-wide judgment?
C. Or do you think that God might judge the world many times between now and the final judgement?
D. Indeed, what need would there be to call it "the final judgement" if it were the only one?

At Matthew 24 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Matthew+24)the Lord's answer was in answer to the question as what will happen at the "end of the age" and since no world-wide judgment has yet occured then it is obvious that the events described by the Lord Jesus at Matthew 24 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Matthew+24)have not yet been fulfilled.

How do you know that there has been no world wide judgment?

Is not everyone judged when they die? Or do you believe in Soul Sleep or some other doctrine where the souls of the dead wait in limbo/nonexestence?

If you do not believe in Soul Sleep or some other similar doctrine, how can you say there has been no world wide judgment, when it is clearly going on right now even as we speak?

TyRockwell

December 13th 2007, 04:10 PM

It was the sons of Levi who were given the responsibilities in regard to the tabernacle and later the Temple:

"This is the sum of the tabernacle, even of the tabernacle of testimony, as it was counted, according to the commandment of Moses, for the service of the Levites, by the hand of Ithamar, son to Aaron the priest" (Ex.38:21).

If the verses from Malachi were in regard to the "royal priesthood" of which Peter speaks then those verses would not specify the "sons of Levi" and would not specifically speak of the "offering of Judah and Jerusalem."

Jesus thoroughly purged the 'sons of Levi.' That is what he did in his death and resurrection. It doesn't happen again. He first pointed out their errors in interpreting the law, and their failures in all the other ways he expressed throughout his ministry, especially in Matthew 23, then he died for those sins along with the sins of all humanity, thereby purging the 'sons of Levi,' and all the world. Just because they fail(ed) to receive the forgiveness that is available doesn't mean there was no purging. The refining was done.

The fact that all Christians are now priests in no way allows for a re-introduction of the Levitical priesthood, as it has been done away with, and the law has changed, and the only covenant that remains is the new covenant in Christ. Even before the new covenant God showed repeatedly that covenantal provisions were not based upon bloodline.

In addition, all the first converts to Christianity were Jewish, before the gospel was preached to the gentiles. The transition from old covenant to new did not exclude Levites from that change, but the change brought all Christians into the place formerly only the tribe of Levi occupied, just as it brought all Christians into Christ the King and Priest. It is this PLACE of priesthood that is only valid to Christians. Thus the nature of the "sons of Levi" changed. Christians ARE Levites, in that we are priests. In like succession Christians are Judah and Jerusalem. We are in Christ, of Judah. We are Jerusalem, the city of God, and the church and Mount Zion, and the Temple all at the same time, now, and to, and through the end of the age.

Yes, there is a future end of the age. But if you understood prophecy, specifically Daniel, which dispensationalist have all wrong, then you would know that there was the end of an age at the time of the end of the temple in 70 AD. It was the 70 AD destruction of the temple which was the abomination of desolation, per your reference to Matthew 24:15. There is no validity to any arguement that God would re-institute Judaism, as that would be to trample on the blood of Jesus all over again. Hebrews 10:29-31 This is what got it torn down in 70 AD, and Caesar's own representative, his general,Titus, carried out the Mennorah. When Jesus decreed desolations and put an end to the temple, per Daniel 9:26-27, in 70 AD, it was THE END, and to be no more. No hypothetical future repeat of 70 AD would be any additional proof that Jesus was and is the Messiah. Nor would it be a greater proof than the punishment that was already poured out.

Chief of Staff Lizard

December 13th 2007, 04:14 PM

Mickey

December 13th 2007, 04:14 PM

Matthew 24:15 refers to the "Holy Place." We should not assume that this is the temple in Jerusalem. God has already built a new temple.

16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?

This theme is repeated throughout the NT
It is you who is "assuming" that the following verse does NOT refer to a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem:

"When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains" (Mt.24:15-16).

You seem to be saying that the "abomination of desolation" has been set up in Christians because you quoted the following verse:

16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?

It that what you believe? Do you think that the Lord Jesus' words at Matthew 24:15 are referring to the "temple of God" spoken of at 1 Corinthians 3:16?

In His grace,
Mickey

TyRockwell

December 13th 2007, 04:25 PM

Oh, my!! That was a very good post Ty. (For those who may not be reading the other thread, Ty and I are not exactly on the same side in that one.) But I must give credit where it is due

Thank you, very much, Lizard.
BTW, which other thread do you mean? I've been involved in a few.

Chief of Staff Lizard

December 13th 2007, 04:28 PM

Mickey

December 13th 2007, 05:04 PM

I have two task I would like for you to do Mickey:

1. Show me any quote from a preterist that says that the "end of the age" does not involve a world wide judgment.
One prominent writer today who is a preterist speaks of the "end of the age" several times and he only says that that time refers to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70::

"When did the ‘end’ occur? The only proximate eschatological event that fits the ‘end of the age’ framework is the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.70" (DeMar,"Last Days Madness", p. 190).

The passing away of the dispensation of the law of Moses, which as limited in great part to Israel after the flesh, might well be called the Jewish dispensation, was justly regarded as ‘the end of the age’ ( Matt. xxiv. 3)…The ‘age to come,’ therefore, is simply a designation for the Christian era, an era that was long ago prophesied by the prophets" (DeMar, "Last Days Madness", p. 190-191).

DeMar never once says that the events which will happen at the "end of the age" refers to a world wide judgment.
2. Answer Jezz's questions:

A. Do you think that God could only judge the world once?
I do not think that the following judgment, a judgment that is in regard to the "end of the age," will happen more than once:

He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).

Do you think that this judgment will happen more than once, Lizard?

Do you think that this event described as happening at the "end of the age" occured in A.D. 70, as Gary DeMar teaches?
B. Do you believe that there could only ever be one world-wide judgment?
Not like the one which the Lord Jesus described at Matthew 13.
C. Or do you think that God might judge the world many times between now and the final judgement?
The only Being in the universe that has the right to judge at the present time is the Lord Jesus (Jn.5:22) and He stated in no uncertain terms that He did not come to judge the world but to save the world (Jn.12:47-48).
D. Indeed, what need would there be to call it "the final judgement" if it were the only one?
Again, the judgment described at Matthew 13 is a one time event.
How do you know that there has been no world wide judgment?
I know that there has not been a judgment like the one the Lord Jesus described at Matthew 13.

Perhaps you think that one like that one has already occured, Lizard. If so, when did it happen?
Is not everyone judged when they die? Or do you believe in Soul Sleep or some other doctrine where the souls of the dead wait in limbo/nonexestence?
I do not believe in soul sleep. Here is what the Lord Jesus says about when non-believers will be judged:

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day" (Jn.12:48).

I believe that this is what Paul is referring to here:

"In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel" (Ro.2:16).
If you do not believe in Soul Sleep or some other similar doctrine, how can you say there has been no world wide judgment, when it is clearly going on right now even as we speak?
Do you not know that at the present time the Lord is not imputing men's trespaases to them now and as Christians we are to proclaim this "word of reconciliation":

"And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation" (2 Cor.6:18-19).

Even though the Lord is not now imputing the trespasses of men unto them now if those people do not believe the gospel then:

"The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished" (2 Pet.2:9).

I believe that I have answered all of your questions, Lizard. Now would you answer the questions which I asked you?

In His grace,
Mickey

Chief of Staff Lizard

December 13th 2007, 05:53 PM

One prominent writer today who is a preterist speaks of the "end of the age" several times and he only says that that time refers to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70::

"When did the ‘end’ occur? The only proximate eschatological event that fits the ‘end of the age’ framework is the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.70" (DeMar,"Last Days Madness", p. 190).

The passing away of the dispensation of the law of Moses, which as limited in great part to Israel after the flesh, might well be called the Jewish dispensation, was justly regarded as ‘the end of the age’ ( Matt. xxiv. 3)…The ‘age to come,’ therefore, is simply a designation for the Christian era, an era that was long ago prophesied by the prophets" (DeMar, "Last Days Madness", p. 190-191).

DeMar never once says that the events which will happen at the "end of the age" refers to a world wide judgment.

Is that the best you can do? I asked to " Show me any quote from a preterist that says that the "end of the age" does not involve a world wide judgment." All you did was quote DeMar speaking ov Mt. 24:3 and not mentioning a world wide jugement.

This is an argument from silence. I could have made the same statement in the context of Mt. 24:3 but that would not mean that I do not associate the "end of the age" mentioned in Mt. 13 with a world wide judgment.

Nice try but you failed to provide any preterist saying what you claim preterist say. Try again, or retract your statement.

I do not think that the following judgment, a judgment that is in regard to the "end of the age," will happen more than once:

He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).

That is a great answer, what question it answers, I don't know. It cetainly dosn't answer the question Jezz asked and I repeated. The question was this:

[/box] A. Do you think that God could only judge the world once?[/quote]

This is a yes or no question, not about a specific judgument. Please answer it this time.

Do you think that this judgment will happen more than once, Lizard?
No.

See how easy it is to answer a yes and no question. You choose either YES or NO. So will you now answer Jezz's yes/no question with a YES or NO?

Do you think that this event described as happening at the "end of the age" occured in A.D. 70, as Gary DeMar teaches?
I don't know what Gary DeMar teaches on Matthew 13, so I am not qualified to answer that. Do you know what he teaches on Matthew 13, I've been looking for some time for something from him on that passage.

Not like the one which the Lord Jesus described at Matthew 13.

Once again you manage to answer the question that wasn't asked. This is the question that was asked:

B. Do you believe that there could only ever be one world-wide judgment?[/quote]

Once again a Yes/No question.

The only Being in the universe that has the right to judge at the present time is the Lord Jesus (Jn.5:22) and He stated in no uncertain terms that He did not come to judge the world but to save the world (Jn.12:47-48).

Is that a yes or a no? But since Jesus also said, "I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him." I guess you need to look at that verse in context.

Again, the judgment described at Matthew 13 is a one time event.

Again, the question was about judgment in general, and a yes/no question. Can you answer it?

I know that there has not been a judgment like the one the Lord Jesus described at Matthew 13.

Perhaps you think that one like that one has already occured, Lizard. If so, when did it happen?

Jezz's questions were about general possiblities. You may "know" that there has not been (or there is not currently happening) a judgment like the one mentioned in Mt. 13. But that assumes your understanding of Mattehw 13 is correct. What if you are wrong?

I do not believe in soul sleep. Here is what the Lord Jesus says about when non-believers will be judged:

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same [B]shall judge him in the last day" (Jn.12:48).

I believe that this is what Paul is referring to here:

"In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel" (Ro.2:16).

Do you not know that at the present time the Lord is not imputing men's trespaases to them now and as Christians we are to proclaim this "word of reconciliation":

"And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation" (2 Cor.6:18-19).

Even though the Lord is not now imputing the trespasses of men unto them now if those people do not believe the gospel then:

"The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished" (2 Pet.2:9).

So do the saved not go to Heaven/Paradise when they die now? Do the lost not go to Hell? If they do, then is this not a judgment? Since this is a judgment, how can you be so certain this is not the judgment of Mt. 13?

I believe that I have answered all of your questions, Lizard.
No you did not. You provide a quote from DeMar that did not say what you said preterist say, and you answered yes and no questions about judgments in general with qualified statements about specific judgment.

Now would you answer the questions which I asked you?

I did. At least one of us can actually answer the questions asked.

In His grace,
Mickey[/quote]

Mickey

December 13th 2007, 06:03 PM

Jesus thoroughly purged the 'sons of Levi.' That is what he did in his death and resurrection. It doesn't happen again.
This is the prophecy that Malachi 3:3 speaks:

"Therefore saith the LORD, the LORD of hosts, the mighty One of Israel, Ah, I will ease me of mine adversaries, and avenge me of mine enemies: And I will turn my hand upon thee, and purely purge away thy dross, and take away all thy tin: And I will restore thy judges as at the first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning: afterward thou shalt be called, The city of righteousness, the faithful city" (Isa.1:24-26).

After the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus the city of Jerusalem was not called "the city of righteousness, the faithful city" for obvious reasons. But of course you would probably say that the city of Jerusalem here is in regard to Christians:
We are in Christ, of Judah. We are Jerusalem, the city of God, and the church and Mount Zion, and the Temple all at the same time, now, and to, and through the end of the age...
However, the Scriptures will be searched in vain where the Christian is ever called "Jerusalem."

Instead, Paul tells the Christian that they have come unto the heavenly Jerusalem and NOT that they are the heavenly Jerusalem:

"But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels" (Heb.12:22).

The following is another example of the purging that will take place in the future:

"And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein. And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God" (Zech.13:8-9).

On "that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem" and on that day the Lord will "destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem" (Zech.12:8-9).

That did not happen at the resurrection nor did it happen in A.D. 70 and it has not happened since that time. It remains in the future.
The fact that all Christians are now priests in no way allows for a re-introduction of the Levitical priesthood, as it has been done away with, and the law has changed, and the only covenant that remains is the new covenant in Christ.
As I said, just because the law changed does not mean that it cannot be brought back. And the prophetic Scriptures reveal that it will indeed be in force upon the return of the King:

"And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem" (Isa.2:2-3).

Of course some will attempt to say that this is happening now by spiritualizing away the plain words here but how can the words that follow be spiritualized away?:

"...nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more" (Isa.2:2-3).

The fulfillment of these verses cleary remain in the future so we can know that in the future "out of Zion shall go forth the law."
Thus the nature of the "sons of Levi" changed. Christians ARE Levites, in that we are priests.
Here is what Paul says about those who are members of the Church, the Body of Christ:

"For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal.3:27-28).
Yes, there is a future end of the age.
Was thee two different "end of the ages" in regard to the age in which the Lord Jesus was living?:

Here He makes it plain that the end of the age in which He was living (the end of THIS AGE) that there would be a world wide judgment:

He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).

Are you wikking to argue that the Lord's anwer to the following question is NOT in regard to the same age in which the Lord Jesus was living?

"And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the age?" (Mt.24:3).

The Lord's words at Matthew 24 are in answer to the question as to what will happen at the "end of the age." Since there has not been a world wide judgement that resembles the judgment described by the Lord Jesus at Matthew 13 then it is certain that the things which the Lord spoke of in Matthew 24 have not yet come to pass.
But if you understood prophecy, specifically Daniel, which dispensationalist have all wrong, then you would know that there was the end of an age at the time of the end of the temple in 70 AD. It was the 70 AD destruction of the temple which was the abomination of desolation, per your reference to Matthew 24:15.
So you are saying that there is an end of the age which will involve a world wide judgment and another "end of the age" that happened in 70 AD?

In His grace,
Mickey

Mickey

December 13th 2007, 06:31 PM

Nice try but you failed to provide any preterist saying what you claim preterist say. Try again, or retract your statement.
Here is what Gary DeMar says:

"The disciple's question (Mt.24:3) involves three interrelated, contemporary events: (1) the time of the destruction of the temple's destruction; (2) the sign that will signal Jesus' coming related to the destruction of that temple; and (3) the sign they should look for telling them that the 'end of the age' has come. These questions are related to the destruction of the temple and the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system and nothing else" (DeMar, Last Days Madness, p.68).

According to Gary DeMar the question in regard to the sign that they should look for telling them that the "end of the age" has come are related to the destruction of the temple and the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system AND NOTHING ELSE!

That would exclude the events described by the Lord Jesus as relating to the "end of the age" at Matthew 13.

I said:

I know that there has not been a judgment like the one the Lord Jesus described at Matthew 13.

Perhaps you think that one like that one has already occured, Lizard. If so, when did it happen?

You did not answer my question if you thought that the judgment described at Matthew 13 has already occured. Instead of answering you said:
You may "know" that there has not been (or there is not currently happening) a judgment like the one mentioned in Mt. 13. But that assumes your understanding of Mattehw 13 is correct. What if you are wrong?
If the following has happened in the past or is currectly happening then surely there would be some historical evidence:

He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).

If you do not think that my understanding of this verse is not correct then tell me your understanding. Do you believe that the angels are NOW or have in the past gathered "out of His kingdom all things which offend"?

Do you think that the following happened in the first century?:

"So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth" (Lk.21:31-35).

Did those living in the first century see a judgment that came on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth?

In His grace,
Mickey

rhutchin

December 13th 2007, 08:55 PM

rhutchin
Matthew 24:15refers to the "Holy Place." We should not assume that this is the temple in Jerusalem. God has already built a new temple.

16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?

This theme is repeated throughout the NT

Mickey
It is you who is "assuming" that the following verse does NOT refer to a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem:

"When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains" (Mt.24:15-16).

You seem to be saying that the "abomination of desolation" has been set up in Christians because you quoted the following verse:

16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?

It that what you believe? Do you think that the Lord Jesus' words at Matthew 24:15 are referring to the "temple of God" spoken of at 1 Corinthians 3:16?

Matt 24:15 refers to a "holy place." Since Jesus made the statement, it would seem that it would have to be something that He would call holy. The church, which is the body of Christ, is one candidate for the "holy place" of v15.

Would a physical temple in Jerusalem also be a holy place after the cross? I am not aware of an argument being made from the Scriptures for this conclusion. I am neutral on the issue, but until someone shows from the Scripture how it would still be a "holy place" I will leave it off the list of possibilities.

rhutchin

December 13th 2007, 09:06 PM

However, the Scriptures will be searched in vain where the Christian is ever called "Jerusalem."

I think the following verses would do so (according to some commentators).

Galatians 4
25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children--
26 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.

Hebrews 12
22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels,
23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect,...

Revelation 3
12 “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. And I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And I will write on him My new name.

Revelation 21
2 Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Revelation 21
10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,

Mickey

December 13th 2007, 09:21 PM

Would a physical temple in Jerusalem also be a holy place after the cross? I am not aware of an argument being made from the Scriptures for this conclusion. I am neutral on the issue, but until someone shows from the Scripture how it would still be a "holy place" I will leave it off the list of possibilities.
Here are Paul's words written after the Cross and he refers to a temple as being "the temple of God":

"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God" (2 Thess.2:3-4).

Since Paul calls it "the Temple of God" then would you argue that it is not holy?

In His grace,
Mickey

TyRockwell

December 13th 2007, 09:22 PM

One prominent writer today who is a preterist speaks of the "end of the age" several times and he only says that that time refers to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70

You might dodge me, but you can't dodge Daniel 9:26-27 that should be clear to you: "the END that is decreed is poured out on the desolate (temple). That is an end of the old covenant age. The next ENDis in Daniel 12:4, "until the time of THE END, many will run to and fro to increase knowledge." That is the END with the harvest analogy. Your mistake is to combine the two ENDS as one future end of the age.

Chief of Staff Lizard

December 13th 2007, 09:39 PM

Here is what Gary DeMar says:

"The disciple's question (Mt.24:3) involves three interrelated, contemporary events: (1) the time of the destruction of the temple's destruction; (2) the sign that will signal Jesus' coming related to the destruction of that temple; and (3) the sign they should look for telling them that the 'end of the age' has come. These questions are related to the destruction of the temple and the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system and nothing else" (DeMar, Last Days Madness, p.68).

According to Gary DeMar the question in regard to the sign that they should look for telling them that the "end of the age" has come are related to the destruction of the temple and the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system AND NOTHING ELSE!

Mickey, you ned to read that in context. Heck you printed the context necessary to understand it, yet you still do not get it. DeMar is talking about the disciples questions in Mt. 24:3 NOT Matthew 13. I agree with DeMar, and he is NOT saying that there will or will not be a world wide judgment. He is silent on that issue. Can you show me DeMar or anyone else specifically saying that there will be no world wide judgment at the end of the age? OR is all you have one quote taken so out of context that it makes one dizzy just thinking about the twist you put on it?

Since this is your third bite at the apple, I assume this is all you have. Point to Lizard.

That would exclude the events described by the Lord Jesus as relating to the "end of the age" at Matthew 13.

How would that exclude Matthew 13. DeMar does not even mention Matthew 13, he is speaking specifically of the disciples questions. You just made that up and now you have been caught with your breeches around your ankles and pretending DeMar said something he never said.

I said:

I know that there has not been a judgment like the one the Lord Jesus described at Matthew 13.

Perhaps you think that one like that one has already occured, Lizard. If so, when did it happen?

You did not answer my question if you thought that the judgment described at Matthew 13 has already occured. Instead of answering you said:

No. What I did was instead of answering your question was to point out that your "question" did not answer the question I posed. You complain and whine like a school girl for me not answering your question to draw attention away from your own failings to answer my (Jezz's) questions. I have asked you twice several yes/no question, you have not answered. Answer those (and answer them yes or no or I don't know) and I will answer your questions. Until them I am not letting you lead ask all the question and me answer all the questions. I don't play that game.

If the following has happened in the past or is currectly happening then surely there would be some historical evidence:

He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).

Once again you are assuming your understanding of what that judgment is is correct. I've asked you before, you didn't answer, will you answer this time? What if you are wrong?

If you do not think that my understanding of this verse is not correct then tell me your understanding. Do you believe that the angels are NOW or have in the past gathered "out of His kingdom all things which offend"?
Yes. (You see I can answer a yes or no question)

Do you think that the following happened in the first century?:

"So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth" (Lk.21:31-35).

Yes.

Did those living in the first century see a judgment that came on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth?

Yes.

Is Mickey going to refuse to answer yes/no question again?

Yes!

Mickey

December 13th 2007, 11:03 PM

Mickey, you ned to read that in context. Heck you printed the context necessary to understand it, yet you still do not get it. DeMar is talking about the disciples questions in Mt. 24:3 NOT Matthew 13. I agree with DeMar, and he is NOT saying that there will or will not be a world wide judgment.
So the "end of the age" at Matthew 13 is not the same "end of the age" which the Lord speaks of at Matthew 13?

Of course it is!

By DeMar's words we can understand that he is speaking about the "end of the age" in which the Lord Jesus was walking the earth.

And that is exactly the same "end of the age" to which the Lord Jesus is referring to here:

"He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).
He is silent on that issue. Can you show me DeMar or anyone else specifically saying that there will be no world wide judgment at the end of the age?
He is not silent on the issue unless you can somehow delude your mind into believing that the "end of the age" spoken of at Matthew 13 is not the same "end of the age" of Matthew 24.
OR is all you have one quote taken so out of context that it makes one dizzy just thinking about the twist you put on it?
I made it plain that DeMar's reference was in answer to the "end of the age" question at Matthew 24 so I took nothing out of context.
Since this is your third bite at the apple, I assume this is all you have. Point to Lizard.
You can have the point if you can make a valid argument that the "end of the age" of Matthew 24 is a different "end of the age" at Matthew 13. Otherwise the point goes to me!

I quoted the following verses:

"So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth" (Lk.21:31-35).

Then I asked you:

"Did those living in the first century see a judgment that came on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth?"

To this you answered:

Yes

I challenge you to provide any evidence that "that day" came upon all that dwell on the face of the whole earth in the first century.

I also quoted the following verse and asked you a question:

He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).

Do you believe that the angels are NOW or have in the past gathered "out of His kingdom all things which offend"?

To which you replied:
Yes

If the angels have gathered out of the kingdom all things which offend then why do we still see people here who do offend and do iniquity? What evidence can you give that this has happened? Just because you say that it has happened or is happening does not make it true.
You complain and whine like a school girl for me not answering your question to draw attention away from your own failings to answer my (Jezz's) questions. I have asked you twice several yes/no question, you have not answered. Answer those (and answer them yes or no or I don't know) and I will answer your questions.
OK, I will answer with a "yes" or "no" and then make comments to support my answer:
2. Answer Jezz's questions:

A. Do you think that God could only judge the world once?
No. However, I do not think that the following judgment, a judgment that is in regard to the "end of the age," will happen more than once:

He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).
B. Do you believe that there could only ever be one world-wide judgment?
No. But I believe that there will be only one like the one the Lord Jesus described at Matthew 13. C. Or do you think that God might judge the world many times between now and the final judgement?
No.

I believe that he will judge the world as described at Matthew 13 and that is the only world judgment that will take place before the final judgment.
D. Indeed, what need would there be to call it "the final judgement" if it were the only one?
That question cannot be answered with a "yes" or "no" answer.
Once again you are assuming your understanding of what that judgment is is correct. I've asked you before, you didn't answer, will you answer this time? What if you are wrong?
If I am wrong then I am wrong. But you have provided ZERO evidence that I am wrong and I know of no evidence which proves that I am wrong.

But what if the preterists are wrong when they assert that the "man of sin" has already come and gone? If they are wrong then their teaching will pave the way for that man to come and sit in the Temple of God and proclaim that he is God.

There will be some who say that he is not who he says he is and instead he is the first beast described at Revelation 13:12-13:

"And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast" (Rev.13:12-13).

Some people who will be present at that time will stand up and say, The preterists say that these verses have already been fulfilled so the one doing the miracles now cannot be the "man of sin"!!!

This false teaching will pave the way to the acceptance of the "man of sin".

What if the preterists are wrong? When do the preterists say that these verses in regard to the first beast were fulfilled?

If the preterists are wrong about this then I sure would not want to be in their shoes when they stand before the judgment seat of Christ to receive the things done in their body, whether it be good or bad (2 Cor.5:10).

In His grace,
Mickey

TyRockwell

December 14th 2007, 01:44 AM

So, how does Gary DeMar rate as a reference in comparison to Daniel? See post #55.

gooner

December 14th 2007, 07:06 AM

But what if the preterists are wrong when they assert that the "man of sin" has already come and gone? If they are wrong then their teaching will pave the way for that man to come and sit in the Temple of God and proclaim that he is God.

There will be some who say that he is not who he says he is and instead he is the first beast described at Revelation 13:12-13:

"And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast" (Rev.13:12-13).

Some people who will be present at that time will stand up and say, The preterists say that these verses have already been fulfilled so the one doing the miracles now cannot be the "man of sin"!!!

This false teaching will pave the way to the acceptance of the "man of sin".

What if the preterists are wrong? When do the preterists say that these verses in regard to the first beast were fulfilled?

If the preterists are wrong about this then I sure would not want to be in their shoes when they stand before the judgment seat of Christ to receive the things done in their body, whether it be good or bad (2 Cor.5:10).

....we'll know who the anti christ is...he'll have 666 tattooed on the back of his head. :blush:

TyRockwell

December 14th 2007, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by Mickey
Here is what Gary DeMar says:

"The disciple's question (Mt.24:3) involves three interrelated, contemporary events: (1) the time of the destruction of the temple's destruction; (2) the sign that will signal Jesus' coming related to the destruction of that temple; and (3) the sign they should look for telling them that the 'end of the age' has come. These questions are related to the destruction of the temple and the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system and nothing else" (DeMar, Last Days Madness, p.68).

According to Gary DeMar the question in regard to the sign that they should look for telling them that the "end of the age" has come are related to the destruction of the temple and the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system AND NOTHING ELSE!
Mickey, you ned to read that in context. Heck you printed the context necessary to understand it, yet you still do not get it. DeMar is talking about the disciples questions in Mt. 24:3 NOT Matthew 13. I agree with DeMar, and he is NOT saying that there will or will not be a world wide judgment. He is silent on that issue. Can you show me DeMar or anyone else specifically saying that there will be no world wide judgment at the end of the age?

Gary Dear is clearly wrong. As is everyone who agrees with a one only end of an age with the destruction of the Temple. It takes a subsequent age to get to "the end" with the harvest judgment on the nations.

rhutchin

December 14th 2007, 10:48 AM

rhutchin
Would a physical temple in Jerusalem also be a holy place after the cross? I am not aware of an argument being made from the Scriptures for this conclusion. I am neutral on the issue, but until someone shows from the Scripture how it would still be a "holy place" I will leave it off the list of possibilities.

Mickey
Here are Paul's words written after the Cross and he refers to a temple as being "the temple of God":

"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God" (2 Thess.2:3-4).

Since Paul calls it "the Temple of God" then would you argue that it is not holy?

Paul refers to the believers as the temple of God in these verses.

1 Corinthians 3
16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
17 If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.

2 Corinthians 6
16 And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will dwell in them And walk among them. I will be their God, And they shall be My people.”

I am not aware of any reference to the physical temple in Jerusalem by Paul. Paul would not, logically, have done this because, after the cross, the temple in Jerusalem has become a pagan facility that would never be referred to as the temple of God except by the pagans themselves.

Consequently, following Paul's use of the term, "temple of God," in Corinthians and lacking evidence for any other use, we should look at Paul's use of the term in Thessalonians as the same as Corinthians. Do you know a reason why we should not do this?

Chief of Staff Lizard

December 14th 2007, 12:10 PM

So the "end of the age" at Matthew 13 is not the same "end of the age" which the Lord speaks of at Matthew 13?

Of course it is!

Once again you put words in my mouth that I never said. The context that DeMar is speaking of is dealing specifically with Matthew 24:3, and does not address the issue of the Matthew 13 Judgment at all. You can assume that he his intent was to mention every single asspect of "end of the age" in that one paragraph. However, an entire book could be writtn on that one phrase, so it is quite a silly assumption on your part.

You could also assume that DeMar had Mattew 13 in mind when her wrote that paragraph (though he never mentions it at all), and is so stupid not to see the obvious judgment entailed in Matthew 13. But that is also a silly assumtion on your part base on DeMar's creditials.

So all you really have is an argument from silence based on far out assumptions (at least you are consistent with dispensational hermenutics).

By DeMar's words we can understand that he is speaking about the "end of the age" in which the Lord Jesus was walking the earth.
By DeMar's words we can understnad that he was speaking about the Disciples questions in Matthew 24:3. We can't understand whether or not he excluded a "world wide" judgment. We have no way of knowing, based on that quote from DeMar, what his position is on Mt. 13.

And that is exactly the same "end of the age" to which the Lord Jesus is referring to here:

"He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).

He is not silent on the issue unless you can somehow delude your mind into believing that the "end of the age" spoken of at Matthew 13 is not the same "end of the age" of Matthew 24

The "issue" that we are discussing is whether or not any preterst denies a "world wide judgement" in association with the end of the age. DeMar is certainly silent on the issue of a world wide judgement in the paragraph you quoted. See:

"The disciple's question (Mt.24:3) involves three interrelated, contemporary events: (1) the time of the destruction of the temple's destruction; (2) the sign that will signal Jesus' coming related to the destruction of that temple; and (3) the sign they should look for telling them that the 'end of the age' has come. These questions are related to the destruction of the temple and the end of the Old Covenant redemptive system and nothing else" (DeMar, Last Days Madness, p.68).

No where in that did DeMar say "they will" or "there won't be a world wide judgment.

There is neither denial nor affirmation. As far as I know, no preterist has ever said that there is not a world wide judgment associated with the end of the age.

You have yet to show that, even though you made this statement:

As anyone can see, not one preterist has been able to come up with a reasonable explanation as to why anyone should believe that the events that will happen at the "end of the age" will not be in regard to a world-wide judgment.

It is my contention that no preterist (at least no preterist that I have herd of or read) has ever said that "the end of the age" does not have a "world wide judgment" component.

Now we may not agree as to what is meant by "world wide judgment" and "end of the age". But to claim victory because preterist can not come up with a "reasonable explanation" of a position they do not hold is either sloppy or lazy. Now if you had just heard of prterism, I might chalk it up to ignorance, buy someone with your years of debate should be well versed in the preterist position. That is if you have actually read your oppents posts, instead of responding to them.

On second though, maybe I should leave in ignorance as on option.

I made it plain that DeMar's reference was in answer to the "end of the age" question at Matthew 24 so I took nothing out of context.

You tried to apply it to the context of "end of the age" in Mattew 13. You tried to make that one small paragraph speak of every aspect of "the end of the age" in detail. How is that NOT taking it out of context.

And before you ask again, yes it is the same "end of the age" in Mattehw 13 and 24, but nothing in DeMar's statement hints that he excluded a "world wide judgment" He was clearly not trying to capture every nuance of the "end of the age".

You can have the point if you can make a valid argument that the "end of the age" of Matthew 24 is a different "end of the age" at Matthew 13. Otherwise the point goes to me!

No, it is your burden to show that DeMar's quote says that there are two differnt "end of the ages" being discussed and that his quote specifcially excludes a world wide judgment. NOT a "world wide judgment" as defined by you either. You have to show that no defintion of "world wide judgement" was allowed by DeMar. Since I can give a definiation of "world wide judgement" that perfectly fits DeMar's words and fits with preterism (though not all preterist, incdluding me) would agree with that defintion, you don't have a leg to stand on.
I quoted the following verses:

"So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth" (Lk.21:31-35).

Then I asked you:

"Did those living in the first century see a judgment that came on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth?"

To this you answered:

I challenge you to provide any evidence that "that day" came upon all that dwell on the face of the whole earth in the first century.

First we have to agree on terms. You know good and well that preterist recognize that the word translated "earth" has a wide semantic range and can be translated "earth" "land" "region" or "country" or a half dozen other ways.

You also know that preterist see the "tribulation" of that day as the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

And if you don't know this, then there is not much use in debating with you as you have been debating preterist for years. If you don't understand something this basic about your oponents position after years of debate, there is no hope for productive debate.

So you either asked the question out of ignorance, which speaks very poorly of your reading comprehnsion OR you issued the challenge knowing that preterist have a different understanding of "the whole world", for some twisted reason of your own.

I suspect that latter. I also suspect your reason was that you enjoy leading opponent down a path of infiite regression where you ask leading questions and instead of addressing the issues your opponents raise, you just ask more question.

In otherwords, you fiegn ignorance in order to avoid dealing with the issue.

I offer you a counter challenge. I challenge you to provide any evidience that the verses you cited (Luke 21:31-35) did not happen as the preterist understand them. In otherwords, prove that Jerusalem was not destroyed in AD 70. Prove that the entire country of Judah, was not desimated by this act?

I also quoted the following verse and asked you a question:

He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).

Do you believe that the angels are NOW or have in the past gathered "out of His kingdom all things which offend"?

To which you replied:

If the angels have gathered out of the kingdom all things which offend then why do we still see people here who do offend and do iniquity? What evidence can you give that this has happened? Just because you say that it has happened or is happening does not make it true.

Once again, this is an issue not of "proof" but of definitions. My definition of this judgment is proven. That is, this is an ongoing process where the angels are continually judging the peopld of the world. Can you prove that this is not going on right now?

Is Hitler in Hell? Is Spurgeon in Heaven? If yes, then they were judged. Right?

So there is a judgment going on. Do you have any proof that this is not the judgment of Mattehew 17? Specifically do you have any proof that the harvest analogy (with harvest not being an instantaneous but ongoing process) must be a one time, instantaneous event?

OK, I will answer with a "yes" or "no" and then make comments to support my answer:

No. However, I do not think that the following judgment, a judgment that is in regard to the "end of the age," will happen more than once:

He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt. 13: 37-43).

No one else thinks this either. With the understanding that "once" and "instantaneous" are not the same thing. An ongoing, contenuous judgement is still a single judgement. Just as the reaping of the first kernal of grain all the way through the last kernal of grain is a single harvest.

But the important thing is that you agree that there can be more than one judgment. That it is possible that the judgement at the "end of the age" and the "final judgement" could be different judgements.

No. But I believe that there will be only one like the one the Lord Jesus described at Matthew 13.

Again, no one disagrees here.
No.

I believe that he will judge the world as described at Matthew 13 and that is the only world judgment that will take place before the final judgment.

Fair enough.

That question cannot be answered with a "yes" or "no" answer.

If I am wrong then I am wrong. But you have provided ZERO evidence that I am wrong and I know of no evidence which proves that I am wrong.

Which is exactly how much evidence you have provide to show that I am wrong. I haven't tried to "prove you wrong" I have tried to engage you in discussion.

But what if the preterists are wrong when they assert that the "man of sin" has already come and gone? If they are wrong then their t