A new preterist is born!

[John Goddard]

Again, this is to talk about everything except the evidence. Deal with the evidence please. Go through the synoptic Gospels and find a single example where houtos genea does not refer specifically to a group of people living at the time, in the normal sense of "this generation."

Matthew 12:41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.

Jesus compared the Purgatory experience of Jonah to his own conscious state of death, so the future sign of Jonah mentioned twice in Matthew 12:39 and Matthew 16:4 is related to three days being three thousand years of Purgatory for the dead:

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Hosea 6:2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.

2000 years revived in the First Resurrection when Jesus returns, 3000 years living in God's sight after Judgment when there is no more sin or death.

Revelation 21:3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

So then the sign of Jonah is for several evil and adulterous generations.

1. The immediate generation of the first century.

2. Here at 2000 years after Jesus left, the people of the Beast:

Revelation 19:19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

3. And here at 3000 years at the end of the Millennium, the people of Gog and Magog:

Revelation 20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

So the claim that houtos genea always refers to an immediate generation has not been proved.

[John Reece]

And yet the cold, hard fact is that in the synoptic Gospels, houtos genea always refers to the people living at the time.

Matthew 12:41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.

[snip]

So the claim that houtos genea always refers to an immediate generation has not been proved.

Jack's assertion has not been disproved by any of the paragraphs I snipped, because none of those snipped paragraphs deals exegetically with the occurrence of [color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color]thV geneaV tauthV[color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color] (tēs geneâs taútēs, this generation) in the text cited (Matthew 12:41).

Ty, must we go though this again?

[TyRockwell]

Wow, Ty! Your just such a skilled debator I must surrender at once! (Actually, no.)

Listen, you answered none of my questions and addressed none of my arguments. So very sorry about the spelling mistakes ... typing quickly on a braille keyboard will do that. Like I said--show me the research that lets you so badly misrepresent preteris and THEN I will begin earnestly debating with you. Until that day comes, however, I will not respond to you. Oh, and as for that slight at my fear of God and possibly my salvation as well ... despicably low tactic, brother.

The despicably low element taking place is in the idea that futile human thinking is anywhere near on a par with Holy Spirit given understanding. I spoke to your smug know-it-all attitude and your haughty pride, not to your relationship to God or your salvation. Why do you have such low comprehension?

Jesus said, "When He, the Spirit of Truth has come, He will guide you into all Truth; for He will not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. He will glorify me, for he will take that which belongs to me and make it known to you."

There is a Teacher who works on the level of spirit and truth; a far higher level of knowledge than intellectualism. The very fact that scholars have produced conflicting and weak positions should show you that mental effort alone is insufficient to arrive at understanding.

When I have been given spiritual understanding, I do not check with those with another interpretation to see if mine is right.

I am amazed, though not surprised at how more often than not a 'hearer' of the posts I make automatically goes into a defense mode, dismissing the message without considering it.

[Faramir]

When I have been given spiritual understanding, I do not check with those with another interpretation to see if mine is right.

I am amazed, though not surprised at how more often than not a 'hearer' of the posts I make automatically goes into a defense mode, dismissing the message without considering it.

That is the greatest bit of comic irony I have seen in a long long time. I just th.....


...wait....you're serious.....

[TyRockwell]

Jack's assertion has not been disproved by any of the paragraphs I snipped, because none of those snipped paragraphs deals exegetically with the occurrence of της γενεας ταυτης (tēs geneâs taútēs, this generation) in the text cited (Matthew 12:41).

Ty, must we go though this again?

John. I know that "this generation" began in the first century. It was the time of Jacob's trouble. Being "saved out of it," happens individually, not all at one time. Being saved is for all, but until each one is saved he remains in trouble. All who believed were translated out of "this generation."

Does a wicked and adulterous generation, (Matthew 12:39) that seeks for a sign, end in a few years, making it alright to seek after a sign?

[John Reece]

John. I know that "this generation" began in the first century. It was the time of Jacob's trouble. Being "saved out of it," happens individually, not all at one time. Being saved is for all, but until each one is saved he remains in trouble. All who believed were translated out of "this generation."

Does a wicked and adulterous generation, (Matthew 12:39) that seeks for a sign, end in a few years, making it alright to seek after a sign?

[TyRockwell]

Originally posted by TyRockwell
John. I know that "this generation" began in the first century. It was the time of Jacob's trouble. Being "saved out of it," happens individually, not all at one time. Being saved is for all, but until each one is saved he remains in trouble. All who believed were, [and are] translated out of "this generation."

John Reece:

Originally posted by TyRockwell
Does a wicked and adulterous generation, (Matthew 12:39) that seeks for a sign, end in a few years, making it alright to seek after a sign?
John Reece:

Think of "this generation" as a people, a nation, rather than a limited time.
Think about it, pray about it. As the Holy Spirit to let you know the meaning and the truth. Expect that he will keep you from being deceived.

edited to add text in brackets to prior post.

[KelDragon]

The despicably low element taking place is in the idea that futile human thinking is anywhere near on a par with Holy Spirit given understanding. I spoke to your smug know-it-all attitude and your haughty pride, not to your relationship to God or your salvation. Why do you have such low comprehension?

Jesus said, "When He, the Spirit of Truth has come, He will guide you into all Truth; for He will not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. He will glorify me, for he will take that which belongs to me and make it known to you."

There is a Teacher who works on the level of spirit and truth; a far higher level of knowledge than intellectualism. The very fact that scholars have produced conflicting and weak positions should show you that mental effort alone is insufficient to arrive at understanding.

When I have been given spiritual understanding, I do not check with those with another interpretation to see if mine is right.

I am amazed, though not surprised at how more often than not a 'hearer' of the posts I make automatically goes into a defense mode, dismissing the message without considering it.

Okay, so let me see if I have this straight. You're saying that "Holy Spirit given understanding"--which I believe in, mind you--completely trumps intellectual exegesis of scripture? Th...th... that is just so, so ludicrous I don't know how to respond. The Holy Spirit empowers the believer to understand scripture by removing the blindness he has in sin. He does not all the sudden make flash bulbs go off in your head, and give you an "interpretation" that deviates completely from the historic faith for the past two thousand years.

Of course intellectualism isn't sufficient to understand scripture; but without it, you will inevitably travel down the road of heresy. This is not to cast aspersion on you, it's just the way it works. You cannot understand scripture without understanding the historico-literary context it was written in. You also cannot fully understand scripture without knowing the original languages (knowledge which I freely admit to lacking.)


So do you think the historic creeds, produced by the church fathers and respected theologians are "different" and "weak", eh Ty? All the great commentaries of the past are lacking in the spirit? Doesn't surprise me, coming from you.

And just because you come to a spirit-filled interpretation that pleases you, you aren't going to bother to check the scriptures to see if you could possibly be wrong? Oh, but wait, you're Ty Rockwell, I forgot--you're never wrong!

Dragon Out

[John Goddard]

Jack's assertion has not been disproved by any of the paragraphs I snipped, because none of those snipped paragraphs deals exegetically with the occurrence of [color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color]thV geneaV tauthV[color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color] (tēs geneâs taútēs, this generation) in the text cited (Matthew 12:41).

Ty, must we go though this again?

Well I know you don't want them to but they do. They disprove it because "this generation" applies to wicked people of three different time periods who face severe Judgment by Jesus:

1. First century Jews.
2. People of the Beast 2000 years after Christ.
3. People of Gog and Magog 1000 years after that in the Millennium.

Again that 2/3 days of Hosea 6:2 is 2000/3000 years, and again in relation to raising the Temple:

John 2:19,21 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up...But he spake of the temple of his body.

3 days = 3000 years, 2000 after Return, 1000 after Millennium:

Revelation 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

So the final Temple of New Jerusalem which is Jesus is raised in 3 days or 3000 years according to 2 Peter 3:8.

[TyRockwell]

Okay, so let me see if I have this straight. You're saying that "Holy Spirit given understanding"--which I believe in, mind you--completely trumps intellectual exegesis of scripture? Th...th... that is just so, so ludicrous I don't know how to respond. The Holy Spirit empowers the believer to understand scripture by removing the blindness he has in sin. He does not all the sudden make flash bulbs go off in your head, and give you an "interpretation" that deviates completely from the historic faith for the past two thousand years.

You say you believe in Holy Spirit given understanding, but you are willing to limit him to 'no light bulbs.' I didn't get 'light bulbs flashing,' but a Presence of him that not only removed blindness, but gave an interpretation that is significantly different from the erroneous interpretations we've had, some of them for nearly 2000 years, some more recent. Don't read 'unbiblical' into that.

Of course intellectualism isn't sufficient to understand scripture; but without it, you will inevitably travel down the road of heresy. This is not to cast aspersion on you, it's just the way it works. You cannot understand scripture without understanding the historico-literary context it was written in. You also cannot fully understand scripture without knowing the original languages (knowledge which I freely admit to lacking.)

Within the amount of knowing the original languages is a line of demarcation between what you need to know, and what you get thrown off course by, less relying on God's 'showing' than in your 'finding.'

I use a Greek/Hebrew dictionary/concordance among other things and several translations. I have used some explanations of the original languages when I believed I was led to, in order to clear up a point that has been wrongly decided. I limit the use of those things in my writing to just those cases and I don't claim to be a Greek or Hebrew language expert.

So do you think the historic creeds, produced by the church fathers and respected theologians are "different" and "weak", eh Ty? All the great commentaries of the past are lacking in the spirit? Doesn't surprise me, coming from you.

There you go again with the haughty attitude, with that 'coming from you' crud. You don't have a reference point.

I said, some of the varying ideas of interpreting Bible prophecy have only produced weak and conflicting opinions. I believe the Bible, I don't think the creeds are perfect. I don't discuss them as I would the Bible, to deal with belief deal with the Bible. I don't use pre-written prayers either.

And just because you come to a spirit-filled interpretation that pleases you, you aren't going to bother to check the scriptures to see if you could possibly be wrong? Oh, but wait, you're Ty Rockwell, I forgot--you're never wrong!

Dragon Out

I already dealt with believing the Bible and the Holy Spirit's giving of the understanding. Of course I check the scriptures, and only write what they are saying. I don't write opinion. Your last paragraph was useless and uncalled for.

Look, I didn't decide one day to sit down and write a book on prophecy. I had no intention of writing any book. The subject was always one of special interest to me, so I did study it. In my youth, I was taught that the pre-tribulation rapture was fact, and that dispensationalism was settled truth. But I remember, in my late preteen years, having a glimpse, maybe a brief vision of Jesus hanging on the cross silhouetted against an evening sky, and I saw it sitting in church reading Daniel 11:45. "And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him."

I knew, apart from being taught it, that Daniel had not been unsealed. I asked if it had been. No one knew. The closest that there was to a definitive answer, was that when Jesus mentioned Daniel in the Olivet discourse, that might have been the unsealing.

I knew, though that when Daniel was unsealed, it would make clear the mysterious passages of the book, and help to better understand The Revelation of Jesus Christ. Years passed, and I was becoming less convinced of the rapture scenario, and was willing to change my mind. I remember praying, about 1981, that I'd like to know it, if Daniel had been unsealed, and that I was willing to change my mind. Still, I had no intention of writing a book. I just wanted to know for my own personal satisfaction.

More years passed. I still believed that Daniel had not been unsealed, or we would have a more sure interpretation. In 1981, I received the baptism in the Holy Spirit and was filled with the Spirit. I had already been saved, at about 11 years old.

Over the following years I had come to be aware of times the Presence and anointing of the Holy Spirit could be 'felt' or 'tangible,' but known might be a better term. Then, in 1994, in a time when I was having an especially strong perception of the Holy Spirit, I opened my Bible to Daniel 12:4 to make use of the presence of the anointing, and began to have knowledge that was just, there.

It wasn't dramatic, but I could understand it, like reading a newspaper. I started working my way backward to Daniel 12:1-2 and it was clear as day. Next, I knew that Dan. 11:45 was the crucifixion of Jesus, and so on, back through the book, a few verses at a time, all the way to the beginning of Daniel, I understood most of it; just being fuzzy on a few things that later more study would clear up.

The same things happened when I read Revelation. I could see things clearly, that I had never seen, and had never heard anyone teach before. I had long suspected that Rev. 4:1 wasn't 'the rapture' when John was told to, "Come up here." Now I knew it wasn't, and I knew what it was. John was taken in spirit to heaven, and back to before the foundation of the world. John saw the throne of God, but so had Isaiah, and Daniel and Ezekiel, and their experiences weren't called a rapture. There was more and more...

I expected someone else would write a book about the unsealing. I thought that surely this must have been a general event that people all over the body of Christ would be talking about, and that books would be written, and it would show up in sermons and on Christian TV. After about a year, I could see that some preachers I had heard had a piece or two of the insights, but if they had more, they weren't talking about it, or writing books about it.

Finally, after that year of denial, I realized I should write the book. So, I started in 1995; reluctantly. Sometimes it was exciting, and I kept getting more insights. I'd sit down to work on a section, and would 'get' more clarity than I'd had before. I did a lot of re-writing; for clarifying more than correction; and for adding details.

Sometimes I would set it aside for weeks or months at a time but always was drawn back to it, and it seems like I would keep getting new and more clear insights that I just had to add.
I finally knew I had to call it 'done' as far as what I had, this year, 2008. Its about the Bible. There is no end to the knowledge...

Some of the latest understandings I'll put into another book, if I'm supposed to write one.

[John Reece]

Think of "this generation" as a people, a nation, rather than a limited time.

If I do that, I will be thinking in terms of your presuppositions, rather than in terms of what the text actually says.

Think about it, pray about it. As the Holy Spirit to let you know the meaning and the truth. Expect that he will keep you from being deceived.

I deleted the emoticon that expressed my initial response to your comment, lest you misunderstand it to be a reaction to the idea of seeking the aid of the Holy Spirit in the study of the scriptures, when in fact it was a reaction to your presumption that you are Spirit-protected-from-error and that — unless I agree with you — I am ignorant and deceived with regard the meaning of the term [color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color]h genea auth[color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color] in the Gospels.

[franktalk]

John Reece ,

I am pretty sure a generation is 38 years. This comes from the time spent in the desert and also the time between Christ coming into Jerusalem announcing Himself as King and the destruction of Jerusalem. Both I think are 38 years.

I am having a great time reading these post. I am so glad I am a futurist.

[John Reece]

John Reece ,

I am pretty sure a generation is 38 years. This comes from the time spent in the desert and also the time between Christ coming into Jerusalem announcing Himself as King and the destruction of Jerusalem. Both I think are 38 years.

That fits within the parameters of the basic meaning of the word [color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color]genea[color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color] (genea), which in the Gospels = the word that it renders in the Hebrew Bible ; that is, [hebrew]DWR[/hebrew] (dōr), as defined by Holladay:

circuit, lifetime, generation (from a man's birth to the birth of his first son, the totality of (adult) contemporaries ; a time with its noteworthy events & people)

[franktalk]

Moses and his people had spent two years in the desert already when they sent the group out to check out the land. They took forty days to check it out and came back with a bad report. The Lord said you will spend 40 years in the desert. Some think that means 38 more years in the desert to make the forty. I think that way as well because it lines up with 32 AD and 70 AD for a generation as well. Also Exo 16:35 says they ate manna for forty years until they entered the promised land. They started to eat manna on the 15th day of the second month. This works with the two years and the 38 years. Num 32:13 says that the generation was consumed.

I just think that the accuracy of the Bible is way more exact than most know.

[John Goddard]

I go with a generation being about a hundred years, a group of people all living at the same time to see events that are supposed to happen.

While forty years is relevant to wandering before reaching the Promised Land, either blessing or curse.