The Preterists and Matthew 24:34

[john w]

Don't you guys ever get exhausted trying to defend the false teachings of Darby?

Don't you ever get exhausted spamming "Darby" on every third "post," as TOL laughs at your satanic sophistry, sweetie? "Darby" is all you have, punk.

Don't you ever get exhausted trying to defend the false teachings of J. Stuart Russell, and Hank Hanegraaf, from whom you copy'npaste/plagiarize?

Tet:

Not a peep.

 

[john w]

It's mind boggling...............

Yes, we agree with you, when your clown act posted this "mind boggling" joke:

“And that is what happened. The Lord came in a way that everyone could see Him. However, He never touched planet earth, and when this event was over, He then sat on the throne in Heaven NOT on planet earth.”-Tet.


"Everyone" that saw Him, according to Craigie, was Josephus, and Wikipedia. Wait....


Vs.

"Tet is a preterist that believes Christ already returned in 70 AD via the Roman Army."-Tambora, on another TOL thread

"Correct, and thanks for making it clear that it was the Roman army that was His return."-stupid Craigie

"The Roman army destroyed Jerusalem in 70AD. That is what Jesus meant when He said He will return."-Gomer Tet.

 

[john w]

Dispensationalists don't care about logic.

They have to throw logic out the window when they try to make the Bible fit the false teachings of John Nelson Darby.

Spam-word for word.


Preterist Perverter Craigie/Gomer's "logic:"

"Tet is a preterist that believes Christ already returned in 70 AD via the Roman Army."-Tambora, on another TOL thread

"Correct, and thanks for making it clear that it was the Roman army that was His return."-stupid Craigie

"The Roman army destroyed Jerusalem in 70AD. That is what Jesus meant when He said He will return."-Gomer Tet.


Shazam, Gomer Tet.

 

[john w]

The following was written by Epiphanius of Salamis in 375AD:

"The Nazoraean sect exists in Beroea near Coele Syria, in the Decapolis near the region of Pella, and in Bashan in the place called Cocaba, which in Hebrew is called Chochabe. That is where the sect began, when all the disciples were living in Pella after they moved from Jerusalem, since Christ told them to leave Jerusalem and withdraw because it was about to be besieged. For this reason they settled in Peraea and there, as I said, they lived. This is where the Nazoraean sect began." - Epiphanius, Panarion 29:7:7-8

The punk, once again, quotes Epiphanius as one of his infallible teachers.

Spam.

 

[john w]

From 60AD - 69AD skirmishes erupted between the Jews and the Romans. There were wars and rumors of wars during that time period.

In 66AD the Roman General Cestius Gallus surrounded Jerusalem and began a siege. Then, for no apparent reason Gallus and his troops suddenly left and headed back to Rome.

A few months later the Roman General Vaspasian came with even more troops. However, Vaspasian returned to Rome because Nero died, and Vaspasian's son Titus took over. Titus surrounded the city and began a siege. The siege and destruction of Jerusalem lasted 3.5 years. (66AD - 70AD)

Even Josephus was surprised that Callus left, and Josephus has no explanation for it.

We know from both Josephus, Eusebius, and others that it was during these few months that all the Christians fled to the hills of Pella.

"The Christians abandoned Jerusalem, crossed the Jordan and settled in those places . Informed of this fact, Nero Caesar sent word to the commander stationed in the East, named Vespasian, to rally his troops and go to Judea with orders to kill all the inhabitants, sparing none, and to destroy the houses." - Eutychius of Alexandria

The punk, once again, quotes Christ rejector Josephusas one of his infallible teachers.

 

[john w]

From Wikipedia:...

The punk, once again, quotes Wiki as as one of his infallible teachers/source authorities.

 

[john w]

Dispensationalists claim Christ Jesus will return to planet earth and sit on a man made throne in a new Third Temple.

The punk spams his satanic sophistry of "man made throne" on every thread, as his "Hail Mary."



Tell us, Preterist con "man"- was the cross "man made?" Was the tabernacle, in the wilderness, "man made?" The Lord God did dwell in the tabernacle-you did know that, did you not, sweetie(rhetorical q)? Was the temple, in the OT, "man made?" Was the temple, in early Acts, "man made?"

Define "God made" cross/temple/tabernacle............

He won't touch that question.

Sophistry...deceit...satanic...from Craigie the Clown. That's his "ministry," on TOL

However, they always exclude David's Tent in their false theory

Was David's Tent "man made," sweetie?

David's Tent stood for 40 years with the Ark of the Covenant in it at the same time Moses Tabernacle stood.

During this 40 years, the priests carried out all the priestly duties at Moses Tabernacle, while David and the people worshipped God at David's Tent.

Was David's Tent, the Ark of the covenant, Moses tabernacle, "man made," sweetie?

IOW, David's Tent and Moses Tabernacle stood almost side by side for 40 years, then the Ark of the Covenant was moved into Solomon's Temple, and Solomon sat down on the throne.

Jump to the first century. Christ Jesus's Tent (spiritual tabernacle) stood for 40 years (30AD - 70AD) at the same time the Second Temple stood. Then Christ Jesus sat down on His throne

Was David's Tent, the Ark of the covenant, Moses tabernacle, Solomon's Temple, Solomon's throne, "man made," sweetie?





noTetosterone:

Not a peep, from the ministry of deceit, Preterist Perverter Craigie.

Sophistry..

 

[Anto9us]

Couple of points...

"this generation" -- i.e. "this and that"

that one scripture passage AINT THE WHOLE SHOOTING MATCHING

on this issue

"there be some standing here who will not die til they see the parousia"

that jives with THIS GENERATION

really meaning "This generation I am living in"

as to the thief on the Cross with Jesus

"THis day you will be with me in PARADISE"

refers to ABRAHAM'S BOSOM

WHEREIN jESUS AND THE REPENTANT THIEF WERE THERE that day ( this day)

I mean - like - THIS DAY that we die - you (repentant thief) will be in PARADISE/Abrahams-Bosom WITH ME

(even though - yeah - I have to

"preach to the spirits in prison" and await "ascending to my Father")

"You - the thief who believed in me - will see that I WON"


ANTI-PRET ARGUMENTS ARE ATE UP AT THIS POINT

oh -- they also say -- they the TWISTERS

( that is means " I say to you TODAY -- that eventually you will be with me in paradise")

No.

Sorry.

Guess again, Grasshopper.

 

[Anto9us]

Go GET 'EM, TET !!

Look at all of this hooie as the only thing they can throw at Preterism !!

IT's almost COMICAL

how their stretches of scripture are thrown to support Futurism !!

it is unbelievable

 

[Jerry Shugart]

IT's almost COMICAL

What is comical and not just almost comical is the fact that the preterists actually think that "generation" is the correct translation here:

"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.21:32-35).​

No first century generation ever saw a world wide judgment happen. Therefore, "generation" is not the correct translation for genea.

You guys crack me up!

 

[Aaron the Tall]

I do understand that some people like to speak in vague generalities instead of actually addressing the point at hand.

Do you think that part A still has another fulfillment and, if so, why?

The verse that Jesus quoted contains two very different prophecies in the SAME sentence. However, when Jesus quoted this verse and announced it fulfilled, He only quoted the first PART of the sentence leaving the other PATH for a later fulfillment. Tet gets all bent out of shape about GAPS in the fulfillment of prophecy, claiming that God doesn't do that.

Gaps in the fulfillment of prophecy is different from partial fulfillment. You clearly mentioned an instance of a gap between when one part of a verse is fulfilled and the rest is fulfilled - but partial fulfillment is a different animal.

 

[HisServant]

What is comical and not just almost comical is the fact that the preterists actually think that "generation" is the correct translation here:

"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.21:32-35).​

No first century generation ever saw a world wide judgment happen. Therefore, "generation" is not the correct translation for genea.

You guys crack me up!

It's all about what those verses really mean.... and they do not mean what you think they do.

Maybe you should actually study a little 1st century Jewish history about what the meaning of those words might actually be instead of letting your ill conceived eschatology dictate what they mean.

Most of these commentaries pretty much put your absurd logic in its place.

http://biblehub.com/commentaries/matthew/24-34.htm

 

[Jerry Shugart]

It's all about what those verses really mean.... and they do not mean what you think they do.

Talk is cheap. If you are right then prove it.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Gaps in the fulfillment of prophecy is different from partial fulfillment. You clearly mentioned an instance of a gap between when one part of a verse is fulfilled and the rest is fulfilled - but partial fulfillment is a different animal.

The reason we see partial fulfillment in some cases is because the "dispensation of the mystery" has interrupted the prophetic program of God.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Whether or not it is symbolic the fact remains that He will be given a kingdom and He will reign on the earth when He returns to the earth:

It MUST be symbolic. You only have two choices: either Jesus is promised to sit on the literal exact gold covered wood throne that David sat on (even though it is long destroyed), or David's throne is a metaphor for something else, even if Jesus is to sit on a literal physical throne called "David's throne".

I really would like to know your concise definition of "David's throne". Do you think it is a position of rule over Israel? Or a position of rule over the whole earth?

"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory" (Mt.25:31).​

This describes His reign:

"...one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven...And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed" (Dan .7:13-14).​

When did it ever happen that " all people, nations, and languages" served Him?

Of course that has never happens so the fulfillment of that prophecy remains in the future.

So, you don't think Daniel 7 is describing what happened at the ascension? The son of man was coming with the clouds - UP TO HEAVEN - for he approached the Ancient of Days in his presence. Fits perfectly with the description of Ephesians 2 where Jesus sat down at the right hand and was given all authority.

When will it ever happen that ALL peoples and nations will serve Him? There will always be some that reject His authority, until the final judgement where the wicked are judged.

Let's assume that you are correct and Christ's Kingdom is not a reality until ALL people are serving him.

1.) Jesus doesn't have a Kingdom in Matthew 25:31 when he sits on the throne, because he doesn't separate the sheep from the goats until AFTER he sits down. IE: there are rebellious people still around after he sits down.

2.) Jesus doesn't have a Kingdom when Satan leads a final rebellion at the end of millenial reign.

Jesus was given a Kingdom IN ORDER THAT all nations would serve Him. It is the goal of the Kingdom - but even you would recognize that not every single person will serve Him.

If you believe the Kingdom of God is still future, what Kingdom was "at hand" when Jesus was on earth? The Kingdom is described as leaven, as a seed, and as rock that fell from heaven and grew into a mountain. The Kingdom starts out small, but grows to fill the whole earth. Your idea of the Kingdom has no growth - there is no process of making the enemies of God into a footstool - there is no reigning UNTIL all enemies are under his feet (I COR 15:25).

Where once the Kingdom was Israel-centric, the blessings of being God's household are now open to all nations. Where the Kingdom began as a small group of Jewish believers, it has spread to every continent, to multitudes of nations!

Make sure you address the fact that the Lord Jesus made it plain that the events described at Luke 21 speaks of a world wide judgment--another thing which did not happen in the first century.

I believe I already made a list of contextual clues in Luke 21 that limit the extent of the events to a certain time and place.

"To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with Me in My throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with My Father in His throne" (Rev.3:21).​

The Lord Jesus is not now sitting in His own throne,the "throne of David," but instead is sitting in His Father's throne! Can you really not see the difference?

David's literal throne was always SECOND BEST. God's original desire was that He himself would rule over Israel, sitting in HIS THRONE. God only gave them a King as a second best option when the people demanded it.

Do you really think a return to a literal man-made throne is a greater fulfillment than the ORIGINAL plan of God reigning on His throne?

Seems like you could read this verse as saying Jesus is sitting with the Father, who is sitting in His throne. Or if want to be ultra literal, you would have to say that both Jesus and the Father are sitting in the same throne next to each other. This could be literal reality, or it could be describing a shared authority. Either way, I wouldn't use this verse as a proof-text that Jesus isn't seated on David's throne, especially since Acts 2 links Christ sitting on David's throne to the resurrection.

Those who overcome will sit with the Lord Jesus in His throne and they will reign on the earth:

"And hast made us unto our God a kingdom of priests: and we shall reign on the earth" (Rev.5:10).​

So, will the overcomers literally be sitting with Jesus in His throne?! That must be one big throne! Or can you see the same logic applies here, that "sitting on the same throne" is metaphor for sharing authority?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

So, will the overcomers literally be sitting with Jesus in His throne?! That must be one big throne! Or can you see the same logic applies here, that "sitting on the same throne" is metaphor for sharing authority?

Yes, it might mean that they will be sharing the Lord's reign and He will reign on the earth:

"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory" (Mt.25:31).​

Would you please give me your interpretation of the meaning of the words of the Lord Jesus there?

I really would like to know your concise definition of "David's throne". Do you think it is a position of rule over Israel? Or a position of rule over the whole earth?

At the least it refers to an earthly position of rule over Israel but it will eventually be world wide.

So, you don't think Daniel 7 is describing what happened at the ascension? The son of man was coming with the clouds - UP TO HEAVEN - for he approached the Ancient of Days in his presence. Fits perfectly with the description of Ephesians 2 where Jesus sat down at the right hand and was given all authority.

No I don't. There are several instances in the Scriptures that speak of the Lord coming in the clouds when He returns to earth but I am not aware of any verses in the entire Bible which uses similiar language to describe Him GOING TO heaven.

Perhaps you are aware of some?

When will it ever happen that ALL peoples and nations will serve Him? There will always be some that reject His authority, until the final judgement where the wicked are judged.

The Lord Jesus' words at Matthew 24 were in answer to this question:

"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).​

Earlier the Lord Jesus spoke the parable of the "tares of the field" where He described what would occur at the "end of the age":

"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."

Obviously a world wide harvest did not happen in the first century. Before the kingdom will be set up on the earth it will be necessary to take out all of those who are not born again (Jn.3:3). After that happens then the kingdom will be set up and then ALL peoples and nations will serve Him.

Let's assume that you are correct and Christ's Kingdom is not a reality until ALL people are serving him.

1.) Jesus doesn't have a Kingdom in Matthew 25:31 when he sits on the throne, because he doesn't separate the sheep from the goats until AFTER he sits down. IE: there are rebellious people still around after he sits down.

That will happen at the end of the age (which precedes the kingdom age) and the following prophecy will be fulfilled then:

"The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath. He shall judge among the heathen, he shall fill the places with the dead bodies; he shall wound the heads over many countries" (Ps.110:5-6).​

With the reference to "kings" it is certain that a world wide judgment is in view. Again, that prophecy has not yet been fulfilled.

2.) Jesus doesn't have a Kingdom when Satan leads a final rebellion at the end of millenial reign.

Sure He will. There will be people in the kingdom in flesh and blood bodies and at the end of the 1000 years Satan will deceive some of them and they will attack the saints. But then these rebels will be destroyed.

If you believe the Kingdom of God is still future, what Kingdom was "at hand" when Jesus was on earth?

Due to Israel's unbelief the kingdom has been delayed until the Lord's return to the earth:

"And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand" (Lk.21:27-31).​

According to your ideas the Lord did come in 70AD but what happened then had nothing to do with the kingdom being nigh at hand. According to Peter when the Lord Jesus returns to the earth the Jews will enjoy a refreshment from the presence of the Lord Jesus (Acts 3:19-20).

That did not happen in the first century or anytime since.

 

[HisServant]

Talk is cheap. If you are right then prove it.

Just read the links.

There is no mystery anymore... the mystery was that the Gentiles were part of the promise.

The only dispensation was one given to Paul (not humanity) to go to the gentiles.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Just read the links.

I do not respond to links. If you have proof that what I said is in error then prove it with your own words.

 

[HisServant]

I do not respond to links. If you have proof that what I said is in error then prove it with your own words.

I didn't figure for being such a coward.... guess I was wrong.

 

[tetelestai]

Tet: "The LORD Jesus Christ returned in the form of a Roman Army."

Never said that.

Which is why you didn't use the quote tag.

Jesus didn't morph into the Roman army, or return in the "form" of a Roman army.

When Christ Jesus said He would return upon a cloud, I specifically showed how it was OT terminology used in Isaiah 19:1

(Isaiah 19:1) See, the Lord rides on a swift cloud and is coming to Egypt....

We know from the above verse that the Lord did not literally ride a cloud into Egypt. It was the Assyrian army that invaded Egypt and wrecked havoc on the Egyptians.

Same thing happened from 66AD - 70AD. The Lord didn't literally come in a cloud, it was the Roman army that invaded and destroyed Jerusalem and the temple, while killing over a million Jews (those that pierced him)