|
|
Post by Sower on Jul 12, 2008 15:44:15 GMT -5
Did the first century generation see the "coming" of the Son of man in a cloud? Jesus promised his disciples when they see "these things" (Luke 21:8-26) BEGIN to come to pass, then look up for their redemption draweth nigh, this generation shall not pass away, till ALL (not some) be fulfilled (Luke 21:28-32). Christians today agree the first century generation saw these things BEGIN to happen, however, they contend that was only a partial fulfillment, with the "coming" of the Son of man yet future. How can there be a "partial" fulfillment or a 2000 years "gap"? Does that not contradict Jesus word that ALL these things would occur during the same generation?  Sower~ |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Kelly on Aug 25, 2008 18:22:05 GMT -5
Does that not contradict Jesus word that ALL these things would occur during the same generation? It does somewhat. When I was a futurist, dissecting Matthew 24 was an ardous task. I changed my mind regularly on what had actually happened and what was yet still to happen. Far too much "first century", "yet to come", "double fulfillment" talk going on, and not nearly enough looking at context. Amazing how many people bang on about context, context, context when it comes to theology, and yet ignore the self same principle when discussing eschatology. Paul |
|
|
|
Post by Sower on Aug 25, 2008 20:35:35 GMT -5
Does that not contradict Jesus word that ALL these things would occur during the same generation? It does somewhat. When I was a futurist, dissecting Matthew 24 was an ardous task. I changed my mind regularly on what had actually happened and what was yet still to happen. Far too much "first century", "yet to come", "double fulfillment" talk going on, and not nearly enough looking at context. Amazing how many people bang on about context, context, context when it comes to theology, and yet ignore the self same principle when discussing eschatology. Paul Hi Paul, What did you conclude based upon the context? Lady Sower~ |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Kelly on Aug 26, 2008 5:09:11 GMT -5
Hi Sower, What did you conclude based upon the context? That when Jesus said "this generation" he meant that generation. That when Jesus said "you" he meant them. That its all down to audience relevance, and the audience that his words were relevant to existed back then in the first century, not in our day (although I suppose his words are relevant to us, just in a different/less immediate way). Paul |
|
|
|
Post by Sower on Aug 26, 2008 12:24:06 GMT -5
Hi Sower, What did you conclude based upon the context? That when Jesus said "this generation" he meant that generation. That when Jesus said "you" he meant them. That its all down to audience relevance, and the audience that his words were relevant to existed back then in the first century, not in our day I absolutely agree! Thanks, Paul!  Lady Sower~ |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Aug 28, 2008 15:52:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Kelly on Aug 28, 2008 16:45:21 GMT -5
Thanks for posting that link Ted. I do enjoy watching Don Preston talk. I've read a good few of his books and find his arguments and presentations interesting, even if I don't always agree. Plus I've corresponded with him on a few occasions and he seems like a nice fellow. I'm looking forwards to some of the other talks too. I've read Sam Frost's book "Misplaced Hope" too, so it will be interesting to see what he has to say.
Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Aug 28, 2008 17:21:35 GMT -5
No problem Paul! Glad to be of assistance...
I am sure I will be begging stuff from this group too!
What is your biggest difference with Mr. Preston?
Blessings, Ted
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Aug 28, 2008 19:28:09 GMT -5
Ted, for some reason my computer is not reading the video file. I installed flash player and it is an active program but the link you gave still tells me I lack the player. Rebooted and still the same problem. I am using explorer 7 but I guess I just won't be able to see the video.
OK, I got it to work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Aug 28, 2008 20:56:09 GMT -5
I really enjoyed the video, Ted, and I plan to listen to it a few more times.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Kelly on Aug 29, 2008 3:52:25 GMT -5
Hello Ted, What is your biggest difference with Mr. Preston? Nothing strictly to do with Preterism. More to do with where some of his other theological views impinge upon eschatology. I'd have to flick through his books again for specific examples. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Sept 5, 2008 21:51:40 GMT -5
Ted, thanks for the link to that video. I'm watching it now. Looks like there are some other good videos there, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Sept 6, 2008 8:56:49 GMT -5
Hi all,
I am in a discussion over at theos.org on this subject. Most of those people are Amill or Partial Pret and so they cut off the prophecy of Jesus as being fullfilled in the 1st century by saying the last several verses of Matthew 24 suddenly projects ito our yet future. Even when I was claiming to be a partial preterist I simply could not justify that kind of thinking. It was not natural and no indication from Jesus was given that He was changing gears and prophecying an event still over 2000 years away.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Kelly on Sept 6, 2008 10:10:02 GMT -5
Hi all, I am in a discussion over at theos.org on this subject. Most of those people are Amill or Partial Pret and so they cut off the prophecy of Jesus as being fullfilled in the 1st century by saying the last several verses of Matthew 24 suddenly projects ito our yet future. Even when I was claiming to be a partial preterist I simply could not justify that kind of thinking. It was not natural and no indication from Jesus was given that He was changing gears and prophecying an event still over 2000 years away. No, I agree. If you go part way you have to go all the way. Otherwise your undermine your own reasoning. You can't insist from context that most of Matthew 24 is past, and then suddenly insist that a few sentences are actually still future. Especially when the only thing that demands such a leap in time is your own preconceptions and NOT context. |
|
|
|
Post by Sower on Sept 11, 2008 10:06:34 GMT -5
Hi all, I am in a discussion over at theos.org on this subject. Most of those people are Amill or Partial Pret and so they cut off the prophecy of Jesus as being fullfilled in the 1st century by saying the last several verses of Matthew 24 suddenly projects ito our yet future. Even when I was claiming to be a partial preterist I simply could not justify that kind of thinking. It was not natural and no indication from Jesus was given that He was changing gears and prophecying an event still over 2000 years away. No, I agree. If you go part way you have to go all the way. Otherwise your undermine your own reasoning. You can't insist from context that most of Matthew 24 is past, and then suddenly insist that a few sentences are actually still future. Especially when the only thing that demands such a leap in time is your own preconceptions and NOT context. I concur ! Lady Sower~ |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Nov 8, 2008 13:36:28 GMT -5
Hi all.
As Allyn well knows, I have a vast historical knowledge of the first century outside of the bible, but the "key" is to reference from within the bible and perhaps provide other sources.
Mat 27:25 Then answered all the people, and said, His blood [be] on us, and on our children.
I am not sure when "modern" man determined a generation was 40 years, but a generation is 70 years and has always been so in the bible. The generation of Jesus' time (this be the generation that saw Him crucified), also saw the coming of Jesus in the clouds (more on this in a minute with another source) and the great day of the Lord played out in accordance with Daniel's prophecy, between 63 - 70 AD in the Roman Wars. The next generation (the Children), saw their demise in the final routing of the Jews in the 130s. So, in effect, history has satisfied Mat 27:25 to a tee.
Now, from Josephus, Wars, Book 6, Chap. 5, Para. 3: "I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armor were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the temple,] as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence."
There is no question that Josephus saw and heard something. Of note are the temple doors - these were huge, solid doors, that required 12 men (priests on each door to open or close, and these doors opened by a command in the "wind". It was at this point that the Shekinah (God's spirit on earth) left the temple.
|
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Nov 19, 2008 17:32:47 GMT -5
Ted, thanks for the link to that video. I'm watching it now. Looks like there are some other good videos there, too. Completely off topic...I tried to make you (Once4all) a friend at CARM, but the system keeps giving me errors. And as for the two other friends that I managed "some how" to get, I can't even correspond with them. Error this and error that. I am always available at canadianpreterist@yahoo.com for those who may be interested... |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Nov 21, 2008 21:34:08 GMT -5
Completely off topic...I tried to make you (Once4all) a friend at CARM, but the system keeps giving me errors. And as for the two other friends that I managed "some how" to get, I can't even correspond with them. Error this and error that. I am always available at canadianpreterist@yahoo.com for those who may be interested... Thanks. At least I know you tried.  You might have to go into Options and enable Visitor Messaging. Bev |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Nov 21, 2008 22:11:08 GMT -5
Did the first century generation see the "coming" of the Son of man in a cloud? Jesus promised his disciples when they see "these things" (Luke 21:8-26) BEGIN to come to pass, then look up for their redemption draweth nigh, this generation shall not pass away, till ALL (not some) be fulfilled (Luke 21:28-32). Christians today agree the first century generation saw these things BEGIN to happen, however, they contend that was only a partial fulfillment, with the "coming" of the Son of man yet future. How can there be a "partial" fulfillment or a 2000 years "gap"? Does that not contradict Jesus word that ALL these things would occur during the same generation? Sower~ Yep. All fulfilled, but not necessarily over and done with. Christ's coming is definitely a past event just as Calvary was, but we are still able to recieve the benefits of Calvary. We are saved now aren't we? I have been working with a dispy for long time now. He has finally admitted that the OT fulfillments have taken place in and to the church BUT ONLY SPIRITUALLY. He fully expects them to be fulfilled PHYSICALLY in his millennial kingdom. Such slow progress. He is bringing our discussions to a close. I think it is because he can't handle the barage of Scripture he gets and feels threatened that I am right in what I say against dispensationalism. And if I am right then he will have to admit he has been wrong for the last 30 years. and then it might make him consider the possibility as to where else have his guides led him... |
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Nov 22, 2008 13:04:40 GMT -5
Mellontes,
And that is the thing that must follow because they do not realize how far astray they have been led from the doctrine of Christ, as they have been taken in their visit to Israel!
|
|
