|
|
Post by didymus on Mar 16, 2010 21:42:28 GMT -5
"And the disciples were first called Christians at Antioch." - Acts 11.26 From the word "Christian" eventually came the word, "Christianity." Christianity is the name of the religion that has Jesus the Christ as it's main character. In fact, it was Christ who established Christianity through the Holy Spirit working through the Apostles. And the teaching of the apostles is Christ centered. What we have in the New Testament is what the disciples of Christ wrote. They wrote about Jesus' public ministry, His crucifixion, His resurrection, His appearances to them between His resurrection and His ascension, and His return within their lifetime. This brief explanation of the teaching of the disciples of Christ shows that Christ is indeed the central figure of everything they taught. Fast forward to today. Today we have several systems of theology from various religious groups. The Catholic, which has Mary, Peter and the Pope as their main characters. Then came Luther, who is credited for starting the reformation from the idea of reforming the Catholic church. Now, it seems just about everybody has their own system of theology. Wars have been fought over systems of theology, so called "heretics" have been put to death because their system of theology did not measure up to someone elses. Church history is full of disagreement, hatred and rancor. I remember studying church history, and I wondered, where Christ was in all that. I look at the church today, and I wonder the same thing. There is no way all the division that we have today is Christ centered. Any doctrine that is not Christ centered is just plain wrong. Likewise, any doctrine that diminishes Christ in all that he did and taught, is also wrong. What must we do? We must simply just accept what is written in the New Testament instead of complicating matters with man-centered theological systems, statements or confessions of faith and doctrine. We must return to the Christ centered message of the apostles. We must jetison all that is man-made, and once again establish a Christ centered religion, if we want to be pleasing to God. Why this message now, you might wonder. In recent months I have once again became involved with the preterist movement, and discovered it is no different than 20 years ago. Back then, as now, I discovered that the preterist movement is no different than any other man-made religious movement that will do anything to prove their point, including twist scripture. If it's the truth, that's not necessary. So what if many people don't want to accept the simple truth. We still must teach Christ centered doctrine, nothing more, nothing less. Fulfilled prophecy is the truth, you don't need to bend and shape it to meet the challenge of the time. Simply stay the course with the truth. I recently had a discussion with some Calvinists. It's amazing how much wrangling they did in an attempt to prove their false doctrine. Folks, foreknowledge is to have knowledge before. There is nothing in that word that suggests affection of any kind. Simply put, God's predestination is based on foreknowledge. We see this in Romans 8.29. Teachers and preachers of man-made doctrines are misleading the masses, and they are like sheep being led to the slaughter. This is the current state of religion in America. The multitude is being led to everlasting life without God. There is very little Christ centered religion in this world. The truth is being forced to the back of the bus, while the lies and deceit are riding comfortably in the front. May God show the world His truth. May God bless those who are seeking the truth, and those that do teach the truth. Amen.  |
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Mar 16, 2010 22:10:18 GMT -5
Prov 23:23 - Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding.
LXX: Acquire truth and you shall not thrust away wisdom, instruction and understanding.
It would seem if one is to be wise then he needs to hold fast to the truth as his possession at whatever cost. Men do not realize that if they forsake the 1st they also forfeit the 2nd.
|
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Mar 17, 2010 0:16:09 GMT -5
Prov 23:23 - Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding. LXX: Acquire truth and you shall not thrust away wisdom, instruction and understanding. It would seem if one is to be wise then he needs to hold fast to the truth as his possession at whatever cost. Men do not realize that if they forsake the 1st they also forfeit the 2nd. Amen!  |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 17, 2010 1:11:00 GMT -5
I just made a short post to my blog here that kind of relates to this subject.
|
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Mar 17, 2010 1:14:30 GMT -5
Isaiah 59:14-15 - And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.
15 Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment.
A few clarifications if you will oblige...
You said, "Back then, as now, I discovered that the preterist movement is no different than any other man-made religious movement that will do anything to prove their point, including twist scripture."
Do you really believe preterism is a man-made movement religious movement? That sounds as if it is not Scriptural, but based upon doctrines of men. Is that what you are saying?
I am also wondering if you could provide a few examples where preterism is being "proved" by twisting Scripture...
You also said, "The multitude is being led to everlasting life without God."
I fail to see how anyone could be led to everlasting life without God. There must be something I am not understanding by what you said. Would you be willing to expand upon it so that I can understand?
Thank you for your time...
|
|
|
|
Post by Morris on Mar 17, 2010 10:13:09 GMT -5
Good post, didymus.
I have also come to the conclusion that I do not need to "prove" my points of belief, but merely show why I believe what I do. If someone else disagrees and shows why they believe what they do, that is fine. If what they show me persuades me, I would study it much further.
But I always ask myself, does this point to Christ or does it detract from Him.
And this leads me to my understanding of "truth"; I do not think that "truth" is in proper doctrine (generally speaking), Christ is the "truth" and knowing that truth is what leads to eternal life.
|
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Mar 17, 2010 10:52:35 GMT -5
Good post, didymus. I have also come to the conclusion that I do not need to "prove" my points of belief, but merely show why I believe what I do. If someone else disagrees and shows why they believe what they do, that is fine. If what they show me persuades me, I would study it much further. But I always ask myself, does this point to Christ or does it detract from Him. And this leads me to my understanding of "truth"; I do not think that "truth" is in proper doctrine (generally speaking), Christ is the "truth" and knowing that truth is what leads to eternal life. That was much the same question I asked myself when I began studying Rev 3 years ago. And by searching to know the glory of Christ alone it opened up the scriptures in a wonderful way! |
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Mar 17, 2010 15:38:17 GMT -5
Isaiah 59:14-15 - And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter. 15 Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment. A few clarifications if you will oblige... You said, " Back then, as now, I discovered that the preterist movement is no different than any other man-made religious movement that will do anything to prove their point, including twist scripture." Do you really believe preterism is a man-made movement religious movement? That sounds as if it is not Scriptural, but based upon doctrines of men. Is that what you are saying? Now that's more like it. Yes I do believe the preterist "movement" is man-made. Not so much the doctrine, bu the the movement. Withing the preterist movement; some are Calvinists, some are not; some are Pentecostal, some are not; some believe water baptism in necessary for salvation, others do not; some celebrate Christmas and Easter, others do not; some attend brick and mortar edifices, others do not. And, even with preterism itself; some see a double fulfillment, others do not; some are full preterists, others are not. Preterists have limited agreement. On most all other beliefs we are a bunch of scrappers. And, yes I include myself in that. We scrap about everything; the five points of Calvinism, baptism, on and on. To me, that makes it a man-made movement. I have just one right now. On the first episode of Bible Prophecy Fulfilled this past Saturday. It was said that Jesus destroyed the temple. They tried to prove it with one of the parables, sorry I can't remember which one. But nowhere does the Bible say that Jesus himself would destroy the temple, and when Jesus would talk to His disciples, specifically in answer to their questions in the beginning Matthew 24, never once did he say, "I will destroy the temple." I did call them, and they never did answer my concerns, at least not to my satisfaction. Besides that, in all my years of identifying with preterism, I never heard that before. I called a friend of mine who was a preterist a lot longer than I, and I talked to his wife. She said they never heard that before either. If you agree with "free will," you will understand that people need to make a choice. On the the way to that choice they are led, either by people teaching the truth, or people teaching lies. People who watch John Hagee are being led, people who watch Benny Linn are being led, and they are being led the wrong direction. In another subject. Regarding your question in your PM to me. Yes I do still believe Jesus was only addressing the twelve. There may have been others standing near-by. When he asked, "Who do you say that I am?" It was Simon Peter who responded. Not one bystander responded. It was during this time that he made the statement, "those who are standing here..." There is no indication that he was a ddressing the masses. Now, isnt this better, you stated your case clearly, then asked you question. Your yea was yea and your nay was nay. So often, poor communication is responsible for bad feelings. It is so important to speak clearly especially with people who does not know you. Of course I have training in communication. Maybe you don't, I don't know. By the way, it is now being discussed about starting a Preterist Church. One more denomination we don't need. Jesus established His church, one church, one body, and He is the head of the church, which His body. Laying the foundation for a new denomination. More proof the the Preterist Movement is man-made. Didy |
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Mar 17, 2010 16:20:49 GMT -5
I just made a short post to my blog here that kind of relates to this subject. If I may ask, which blog is it. |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Mar 17, 2010 16:55:27 GMT -5
Isaiah 59:14-15 - And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter. 15 Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment. A few clarifications if you will oblige... You said, " Back then, as now, I discovered that the preterist movement is no different than any other man-made religious movement that will do anything to prove their point, including twist scripture." Do you really believe preterism is a man-made movement religious movement? That sounds as if it is not Scriptural, but based upon doctrines of men. Is that what you are saying? Now that's more like it. Yes I do believe the preterist "movement" is man-made. Not so much the doctrine, bu the the movement. Withing the preterist movement; some are Calvinists, some are not; some are Pentecostal, some are not; some believe water baptism in necessary for salvation, others do not; some celebrate Christmas and Easter, others do not; some attend brick and mortar edifices, others do not. And, even with preterism itself; some see a double fulfillment, others do not; some are full preterists, others are not. Preterists have limited agreement. On most all other beliefs we are a bunch of scrappers. And, yes I include myself in that. We scrap about everything; the five points of Calvinism, baptism, on and on. To me, that makes it a man-made movement. I have just one right now. On the first episode of Bible Prophecy Fulfilled this past Saturday. It was said that Jesus destroyed the temple. They tried to prove it with one of the parables, sorry I can't remember which one. But nowhere does the Bible say that Jesus himself would destroy the temple, and when Jesus would talk to His disciples, specifically in answer to their questions in the beginning Matthew 24, never once did he say, "I will destroy the temple." I did call them, and they never did answer my concerns, at least not to my satisfaction. Besides that, in all my years of identifying with preterism, I never heard that before. I called a friend of mine who was a preterist a lot longer than I, and I talked to his wife. She said they never heard that before either. If you agree with "free will," you will understand that people need to make a choice. On the the way to that choice they are led, either by people teaching the truth, or people teaching lies. People who watch John Hagee are being led, people who watch Benny Linn are being led, and they are being led the wrong direction. In another subject. Regarding your question in your PM to me. Yes I do still believe Jesus was only addressing the twelve. There may have been others standing near-by. When he asked, "Who do you say that I am?" It was Simon Peter who responded. Not one bystander responded. It was during this time that he made the statement, "those who are standing here..." There is no indication that he was a ddressing the masses. Now, isnt this better, you stated your case clearly, then asked you question. Your yea was yea and your nay was nay. So often, poor communication is responsible for bad feelings. It is so important to speak clearly especially with people who does not know you. Of course I have training in communication. Maybe you don't, I don't know. By the way, it is now being discussed about starting a Preterist Church. One more denomination we don't need. Jesus established His church, one church, one body, and He is the head of the church, which His body. Laying the foundation for a new denomination. More proof the the Preterist Movement is man-made. Didy Of course, I have no professional training in communication, but I still disagree with your post in general. You were saying "Preterism" was a man-made movement and gave your reasons why. It would seem that your "beefs" are not with preterism itself, but with those inside of preterism. Now, at this point, we must define preterism. Is it a movement or a theological description? I take it as being a theological description. I would imagine that if all of us were to secretly define what "Preterism" was and then hit the electronic "ENTER" key at the same time, we would have as many definitions as there were respondents. My definition of preterism: All prophecies fulfilled, with the caveat that some of those prophecies have residual effects to the present - like the constant and ongoing Gospel with people entering the kingdom of Christ. I don't add anything to "Preterism" to make it anything more than that. Others may. It may very well be that those "other things" constitute man-made movements within the hierarchy of an "all things fulfilled" theology, but I don't think our theology (if my definition is to be accepted) is based upon man-made doctrine. I should strongly desire to separate the two terms of theology and movement. At present, there is no doubt "Preterism" is becoming fractured, and hence, the desire to give it structure. As I have already stated on this forum (I think it was this one), I believe this will be a natural progression of the theology and there likely will be many movements within it - kind of like the Fellowship Baptists, Independent Baptists, Regular Baptists and Southern Baptists and 100 more Baptists. (Sorry if using the word Baptist offended anyone...  ) [Allyn, is there any way we can get smaller emoticons?]And regarding the radio show and whether Jesus destroyed the temple, it would be beneficial to check out the many other Days of the Lord to see how judgment came upon those deserving of it. In the NT, judgment was given to the Son (John 5:27) and His coming would be "in the glory of the Father's" (Matthew 16:27). In other words, the way judgment would be dished out would be the same as the LORD had done so before in the OT - like Isaiah 13 when the Medes were used to wipe out Babylon even though it was a judgment from deity...And perhaps Daniel 9:26 sheds some light on this depending upon who you believe the "prince" is. Perhaps PsychoMike could give us the parable that was being used in an attempt to answer Didymus' question. I wouldn't mind knowing too. Thank you for your time. In case you are unaware, I had sent you a personal message (PM) this morning... |
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Mar 17, 2010 18:05:49 GMT -5
Mell, I never did say that preterism is doctrinally man made. Please don't add to what I said. It is the movement itself that have the marks of being man-made. And I already explained that. By the way, I agree with your description of preterism. So if we agree on doctrine, why all the condemnation from you?  |
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Mar 17, 2010 18:12:57 GMT -5
That was much the same question I asked myself when I began studying Rev 3 years ago. And by searching to know the glory of Christ alone it opened up the scriptures in a wonderful way! Absolutely! When you study the Scriptures from a Christ-centric perspective, it really is opened up in a wonderful way. It makes me feel better to someone else say that.  |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Mar 17, 2010 20:42:27 GMT -5
Mell, I never did say that preterism is doctrinally man made. Please don't add to what I said. It is the movement itself that have the marks of being man-made. And I already explained that. By the way, I agree with your description of preterism. So if we agree on doctrine, why all the condemnation from you? Excuse me, what condemnation??? |
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Mar 17, 2010 22:18:22 GMT -5
Excuse me, what condemnation??? That's the way you make me feel. Doesn't matter. I have some of that in me too. You see, I don't believe all preterists are Christians. The Truth of God's Word is more than eschatology. You can believe the truth in one area, and jeteson the rest. You can't be saved that way. Jesus once said " I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no one comes to the Father but through Me." Jesus is not partial truth, He is all truth. If you do not believe all truth, you cannot be saved. Some preterists practice idolatry. So, I am about ready to detatch my self from the preterist movemnt again. It has not changed in 20 years. Have a nice day. |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Mar 17, 2010 23:03:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2010 0:13:24 GMT -5
I just made a short post to my blog here that kind of relates to this subject. If I may ask, which blog is it. If you go to the main forums page here, you'll see a section called "Personal Blogs for Members." Any member can have a blog, you just have to ask Allyn to create it for you. It works the same way as a forum. Anyway, mine is "Bev's Personal Blog," the only one listed because I guess I'm the only one that requested one. There's not much there and I've actually considered just having it deleted. I don't really have a blogger mentality. |
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Mar 18, 2010 3:12:32 GMT -5
Bev, I do not know how to tell you this, but you did not understand what Iwas asking. I did not ask where your blogs are, I already know that. I asked which blog is it. You have three of them, which of the three is the one you referred to? I guess I should have laid a better foundation. But, I think you know the difference between the words, "which" and "where."
|
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Mar 18, 2010 11:43:21 GMT -5
You said, " Back then, as now, I discovered that the preterist movement is no different than any other man-made religious movement that will do anything to prove their point, including twist scripture." Do you really believe preterism is a man-made movement religious movement? That sounds as if it is not Scriptural, but based upon doctrines of men. Is that what you are saying? I have just one right now. On the first episode of Bible Prophecy Fulfilled this past Saturday. It was said that Jesus destroyed the temple. They tried to prove it with one of the parables, sorry I can't remember which one. But nowhere does the Bible say that Jesus himself would destroy the temple, and when Jesus would talk to His disciples, specifically in answer to their questions in the beginning Matthew 24, never once did he say, "I will destroy the temple." I did call them, and they never did answer my concerns, at least not to my satisfaction. May I invite all to listen to their exchange: Source: ad70.net/podcast/bible-prophecy-fulfilled/bible-prophecy-fulfilled-03-13-2010-early/Tom's question begins at the 19:50 mark... |
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Mar 18, 2010 13:08:07 GMT -5
The tribulation is that which concerns ONLY the saints - the 1st 3 1/2 yrs of a final 7 year period. When they see Israel surrounded by armies the mid point is reached and the saints flee. That is the sign of the Lord coming in judgment at the end of the time of the persecution of the saints. It also marks the time of the resurrection of the dead and when the judgment upon Israel begins to fall. Which the temple's destruction marks the end of the day of the Lord when 'It is done' is announced.
The 70th week of Daniel only concerns the faithful remnant. It is split into 2 - 3 1/2 year periods marked by the appearance of Christ into our world and His return in the clouds of heaven which brings it to a close - signs accompany each half to give light to the saints. 1st half: baptism of Christ to the cross; 2nd half: persecution of saints end when armies surround Jerusalem. These things mark the end of each period, therefore the way to find when they begin is to count BACKWARDS from each of those signs. This is the after the fact light that comes from true prophecy when it is fulfilled that causes us to believe what was told beforehand and builds our faith in God. None of the disciples believed the Lord was going to die until after it happened - then they believed what He had spoken about it beforehand. That was when they understood those things which all the prophets had foretold.
The other period that parallels that week is what applies to the apostates which begins at the cross to mark its first half that ends at the death of Stephen and then its final period is marked by the same armies who bring the final destruction until the desolation is accomplished. The FORWARD slant of this part of prophecy gives no light to those who are part of it. Which is why hearing of future things give no warning nor light to them - because they are the ones who will do these things.
Thus the time after the 69th week contains all these things - things concerning saints for their salvation and things concerning apostates for their judgment. The perfect antitype to the day of atonement which begins at the cross, the feast of trumpets whereby the dead are called to rise to judgment, and the feast of tabernacles which follows with God dwelling all in all His people as concerns the saints who are all alive in Christ whether in heaven or on the earth.
The other week is covered in mystery as no one knows when it will come so that it can come upon the apostates as a thief. The light of the prophecy is for the saints and they were warned by signs - when those signs appeared. The apostates did not know they would crucify the Lord and is why they were blinded, and it is also why they didn't think any judgment was coming upon them because of it. The signs didn't reveal a thing to them about the things spoken of which concerned them.
Hebrew parallelism is hard to understand but is well worth the time it takes to look into it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2010 13:54:12 GMT -5
Bev, I do not know how to tell you this, but you did not understand what Iwas asking. I did not ask where your blogs are, I already know that. I asked which blog is it. You have three of them, which of the three is the one you referred to? I guess I should have laid a better foundation. But, I think you know the difference between the words, "which" and "where." I have THREE?! I know of two. Where's the third? Or are you referring to my Facebook page as a blog? Anyway, the blog in question is the one at this site (the one we are on right now). That's why in my original post I specifically said "my blog here". Here, not there or anywhere else. Here. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2010 13:56:50 GMT -5
Bev, I do not know how to tell you this, but you did not understand what Iwas asking. I did not ask where your blogs are, I already know that. I asked which blog is it. You have three of them, which of the three is the one you referred to? I guess I should have laid a better foundation. But, I think you know the difference between the words, "which" and "where." I have THREE?! I know of two. Where's the third? Or are you referring to my Facebook page as a blog? Anyway, the blog in question is the one at this site (the one we are on right now). That's why in my original post I specifically said "my blog here". Here, not there or anywhere else. Here. Oh, WAIT!!! You don't mean which blog, you mean which ENTRY in my blog. That would be the newest entry, "Praise be to God." Whew! I hope we're straight now. |
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Mar 18, 2010 13:57:27 GMT -5
And I might add, the futurist is stuck in darkness and mystery as he still looks for these things to come upon the earth, while the preterist lets the glory of the Lord be his light. A glory not yet come cannot bring any light until it is revealed. Something to consider, I hope as we continue to walk in the light of His glory.
|
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Mar 18, 2010 14:10:26 GMT -5
I have THREE?! I know of two. Where's the third? Or are you referring to my Facebook page as a blog? Anyway, the blog in question is the one at this site (the one we are on right now). That's why in my original post I specifically said "my blog here". Here, not there or anywhere else. Here. Oh, WAIT!!! You don't mean which blog, you mean which ENTRY in my blog. That would be the newest entry, "Praise be to God." Whew! I hope we're straight now. Hey Bev, I'm with Didymus on this one. I read all three of the entries over again and couldn't find the one you were referring to. And now that you have definitely connected the dots, I still don't see the relationship. I guess I am getting much too old...  |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2010 14:32:10 GMT -5
Hey Bev, I'm with Didymus on this one. I read all three of the entries over again and couldn't find the one you were referring to. And now that you have definitely connected the dots, I still don't see the relationship. I guess I am getting much too old... No, you're not getting too old.  The connection is a bit nebulous, which is why I posted it in my blog in the first place, rather than here in this thread. It was more a matter of the thread reminding me of something (ergo, a strand of connection), but it wasn't directly relevant enough to the topic to post here. I'm sorry for all the confusion! Consider the blog post a wholly separate topic. That's probably easiest. |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Mar 18, 2010 15:23:20 GMT -5
A lot in this post...let me parse through and see what I come up with. I sure wish you would put some references in parentheses when you make a point 'cause some of us (me) just don't have as much of the Bible memorized as you seem to. The tribulation is that which concerns ONLY the saints - the 1st 3 1/2 yrs of a final 7 year period. Two things: 1. I am under the impression that the Great tribulation concerned ONLY Apostate Jews. Is this the period you meant by " tribulation" as well? It seems that way because of the mention of the last 3 1/2 years... 2. What event begins the start of this 7 year period? I have no problem with the last 3 1/2 years, except the idea that it is not upon the saints. But true enough, tribulation had been upon the saints for MANY years. Paul had once been a major factor in that. To me, 2 Thess 1:6-8 shows me the GREAT tribulation upon the apostate Jews because they "tribulated" the Christians, especially verse 6. When they see Israel surrounded by armies the mid point is reached and the saints flee. Again, I must ask what event is the starting point of this 7 year period, the 3 1/2 years literal years referring to the last part...hope I am not being to repetitious... I am trying to determine how you know it is the mid-point. That is the sign of the Lord coming in judgment at the end of the time of the persecution of the saints. So, are you saying that the fleeing of Christians is the sign for the Lord coming in judgment? I sure wish you could give the references for this stuff as you go along. It would sure serve as a time reference. I am not even sure what exact Scriptures you are referring to, so it is difficult to even offer comment. I have no problem believing that the start of judgment would now come because the "righteous" as in the days of Noah and in the days of Lot had been removed. For those who ignored the warning and stayed and would consequently fall under the same judgment (and I am sure they must have been a few), then I would consider them as Lot's wife who "looked back" suffering her own individual judgment. It also marks the time of the resurrection of the dead and when the judgment upon Israel begins to fall. Which the temple's destruction marks the end of the day of the Lord when 'It is done' is announced. If ' it" refers to the beginning of judgment, then I disagree. I am under the impression that the resurrection occurred after the 3 1/2 years of great tribulation and very close to the final destruction of the temple if not at or right after (not years) that event. Mark 13:24-27 seem to say that the gathering (resurrection) occurs after the tribulation, that is if the gathering refers to the resurrection of the elect. Matthew 24:21 seems to say the tribulation begins AFTER the saints have fled. Matthew 24:29-31 states what Mark 13:24-27 says The 70th week of Daniel only concerns the faithful remnant. It is split into 2 - 3 1/2 year periods marked by the appearance of Christ into our world and His return in the clouds of heaven which brings it to a close - signs accompany each half to give light to the saints. 1st half: baptism of Christ to the cross; 2nd half: persecution of saints end when armies surround Jerusalem. These things mark the end of each period, therefore the way to find when they begin is to count BACKWARDS from each of those signs. This is the after the fact light that comes from true prophecy when it is fulfilled that causes us to believe what was told beforehand and builds our faith in God. I see you take Don Preston's view of the 70th week of Daniel's vision. As much as I respect Don and the many things he has written, this is one of the areas where I disagree. We have 69 literal weeks of years then a 70th week which contains a literal gap of almost 40 years. I have a real problem with gaps. The futurists love this kind of exegesis. They say (and have said) if you allow a gap of 40 years between the beginning and ending of the 70th week, why won't you allow us a gap in between the 69th and 70th week. Same principle. 69 literal weeks and then the gaps start... None of the disciples believed the Lord was going to die until after it happened - then they believed what He had spoken about it beforehand. That was when they understood those things which all the prophets had foretold. The other period that parallels that week is what applies to the apostates which begins at the cross to mark its first half that ends at the death of Stephen and then its final period is marked by the same armies who bring the final destruction until the desolation is accomplished. The FORWARD slant of this part of prophecy gives no light to those who are part of it. Which is why hearing of future things give no warning nor light to them - because they are the ones who will do these things. Thus the time after the 69th week contains all these things - things concerning saints for their salvation and things concerning apostates for their judgment. The perfect antitype to the day of atonement which begins at the cross, the feast of trumpets whereby the dead are called to rise to judgment, and the feast of tabernacles which follows with God dwelling all in all His people as concerns the saints who are all alive in Christ whether in heaven or on the earth. The other week is covered in mystery as no one knows when it will come so that it can come upon the apostates as a thief. This point I especially like! Many people believe in a future physical rapture from off of this planet. And they do so using the " He comes as a thief" motif. If they were to understand how it is the apostates who are taken in judgment (as in Matthew 24:40-41, Luke 17:34-36), they could have more reason to abandon their physical, rapture theory. I think Paul in 1 Thessalonians 5:1-9 makes that abundantly clear in his "day" versus "night" and "light" versus "darkness" theme... The light of the prophecy is for the saints and they were warned by signs - when those signs appeared. The apostates did not know they would crucify the Lord and is why they were blinded, and it is also why they didn't think any judgment was coming upon them because of it. The signs didn't reveal a thing to them about the things spoken of which concerned them. Not sure if I understand you here. Are you saying that ALL signs were for believing Jews? And if not, could you specify which signs you are speaking of here. I am fairly certain that Jesus used signs in regrads to some conversations with the unbelieving Pharisees. Hebrew parallelism is hard to understand but is well worth the time it takes to look into it. Absolutely true! Now, if we could only get together and find out what the one true understanding is... |
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Mar 18, 2010 16:16:53 GMT -5
I have THREE?! I know of two. Where's the third? Or are you referring to my Facebook page as a blog? Anyway, the blog in question is the one at this site (the one we are on right now). That's why in my original post I specifically said "my blog here". Here, not there or anywhere else. Here. Oh, WAIT!!! You don't mean which blog, you mean which ENTRY in my blog. That would be the newest entry, "Praise be to God." Whew! I hope we're straight now. Bev, let me tell you, this new terminology is driving me a wall. I bet it has caused it's share of misunderstandings. I am very sorry. |
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Mar 18, 2010 16:53:16 GMT -5
Oh, WAIT!!! You don't mean which blog, you mean which ENTRY in my blog. That would be the newest entry, "Praise be to God." Whew! I hope we're straight now. Hey Bev, I'm with Didymus on this one. I read all three of the entries over again and couldn't find the one you were referring to. And now that you have definitely connected the dots, I still don't see the relationship. I guess I am getting much too old... I don't know how to say this Mell, but are you well? You are agreeing with me. You have just changed my mind about preterism, I am now convinced the world is going to end and soon. You agreeing with me has to be a sign of the end. Good evening Mell, |
|
|
|
Post by stephenpatrick on Mar 18, 2010 17:31:44 GMT -5
I guess I am getting much too old... No, you're not getting too old. Bev, I agree with Ted on this one.  |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Mar 18, 2010 20:23:31 GMT -5
Hey Bev, I'm with Didymus on this one. I read all three of the entries over again and couldn't find the one you were referring to. And now that you have definitely connected the dots, I still don't see the relationship. I guess I am getting much too old... I don't know how to say this Mell, but are you well? You are agreeing with me. You have just changed my mind about preterism, I am now convinced the world is going to end and soon. You agreeing with me has to be a sign of the end. Good evening Mell, I calls 'em the way I sees 'em. I am not one of those who would cause a 73 car collision on the freeway to avoid hitting a cute-looking bunny rabbit... Now that you are back to being a futurist, you are going to have a real tough time deciphering my posts. We are going to have to go way back to Hebrew figures and symbols... |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 18, 2010 20:24:53 GMT -5
I guess I am getting much too old... No, you're not getting too old. Bev, I agree with Ted on this one. HA HA HA HA HA! Good one, Steve. |
|
