Bob Carabbio
Well-known member
Totally unimportant to me personally. I'll be gone shortly, and will watch the whole thing from the other side, and we'll have a good LAUGH at how silly our "Eschatology" was.
"Coming", but how and when?
- Thread starter Yodas_Prodigy
- Start date
Yodas_Prodigy
Well-known member
The earth is the terra firma "soil" located in Israel... Note, earth is not capitalized either... In the NAS Bible, the only time earth has a capital E is when every letter in the sentence is capitalized. That is 66 small e's and one Capital E...
Yodas_Prodigy
Well-known member
Nice deflection
Peter wrote this letter in about 57 AD... I think "at hand" could be a mere 13 years...
Yes it is and yes you are...
That is absurd. God doesn't write things then leave us guessing what he meant by near, soon and short. That is your deflection to avoid the obvious.
Last edited:
Yodas_Prodigy
Well-known member
That happens...
BlessedAnomaly
Well-known member
Even though it isn't a deflection. ?
So, ok, we've narrowed "at hand" to mean "immediately, or possibly 13 years." Can we go for 15?
No, it isn't, and I'm not. Your hermeneutic isn't working.Yes it is and yes you are...
God doesn't write in code. He didn't leave all the non-Preterist guessing, did he?
And I notice that you cut my response about Revelation 22 right out of the discussion. That certainly didn't fit your hermeneutic in the least, did it?
"At hand" and "must shortly take place" must be thousands of years apart. Minus thirteen, of course.
Yodas_Prodigy
Well-known member
I actually posted 15 and then changed it to 13. My mind was doing math very well at that moment.
No, I ignored it. I was getting tired and board of your comments...
We have reached another impasse.
BlessedAnomaly
Well-known member
Then let's try 20?
You ignored it because it shows that your hermeneutic doesn't work. It blatantly shows the error in your teaching.
Talk about deflection. It is not an impasse when you refuse to deal with a direct hit to your argument.
Deal with Revelation 22!!
If you don't deal with it here, I pray that you see what damage you do with the words themselves. Study on this and you will see that how your attempt to use these "time based" words is in error and will not stand. Perhaps it is not a "crushing blow" to your eschatology, but it certainly should show that this is not the way to buttress your argument.
Yodas_Prodigy
Well-known member
Done
The apostle’s final section reviews and summarizes
the central messages of the book. Appropriately, St.
John’s angelic guide begins by testifying that these
words are faithful and true, in keeping with the
character of their Author (1:5; 3:14; 19:11; cf. 19:9;
21:5); they cannot fail to be fulfilled. And the Lord,
the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent His angel
to show to His servants the things which must
shortly take place. The word spirits here may refer to
the “Seven Spirits” (cf. 1:4; 4:5), i.e. the Holy Spirit in
His manifold operation through the prophets (cf.
19:10: “the Spirit of prophecy”), but it is possible also
to understand the expression in the sense of 1
Corinthians 14:32 – the spirit of each prophet in
particular. In any case, St. John has repeatedly
emphasized throughout his prophecy that “all the
LORD’s people are prophets” in this age, having
ascended with Christ to the heavenly Council chamber.
The function of the Book of Revelation is
that of an official “memo” to all members of the
Council, telling them what they need to know
regarding imminent events. The consistent message of
the whole book is that the things of which it speaks –
the final end of the Old Covenant and the firm
establishment of the New – are on the verge of
fulfillment, irrevocably destined to take place shortly.
Speaking on behalf of Christ, the angel repeats the
theme of the prophecy, underscoring its immediacy:
Behold, I am coming quickly (cf. 1:7; 2:5, 16; 3:11;
16:15); in fact, the word come or coming (erchomai) is
used seven times in Chapter 22 alone: “The frequency
of the assurance now before us, shows with what
earnestness it was made.” 8 Our study of the New
Testament is drastically off-course if we fail to take into
account the apostolic expectation of an imminent
Coming of Christ (not the Second Coming) which
would destroy “this generation” of Israel and fully
establish the New Covenant Church. This message was
not to be taken lightly, and there is an implicit warning
in Revelation’s Sixth Beatitude, a promise that echoes
the First (1:3): Blessed is he who keeps the words of
the prophecy of this book. Again, St. John stresses the
ethical response of his audience to the truths they have
heard. He has given them commandments to obey (cf.
v. 14), not only explicitly but implicitly: He has
revealed the activity of heaven as a pattern for life on
earth (cf. Matt. 6:10)
BlessedAnomaly
Well-known member
Ok.
Then your view is that Chapter 22 is in the past, that this is the "final end of the Old Covenant." For that is clearly what this says.
Also, Chilton's view is that Chapter 19 is also in the past, contrary to what you've previously stated your view is.
robycop3
Well-known member
The earth is the land-any land.
Yodas_Prodigy
Well-known member
I am satisfied with my position. IMHO Partial Preterism has the least baggage of all of the eschatologies.
robycop3
Well-known member
EXCEPT...The events haven't yet occurred, especially the great trib, or Jesus woulda returned by now.
BlessedAnomaly
Well-known member
Which is fine. Free will allows you to choose. ?
So you have ch 19 in the future, ch 22 is in the past. Chapters 19-22 are a single narrative biblically. Good job.
Yodas_Prodigy
Well-known member
Nope... You are being absurd in an attempt to embarrass me.
Then he said to me, “These words are faithful and true.” And the Lord God of the holy prophets sent His angel to show His servants the things which must shortly take place.
The passage says, "the things that must shortly take place." Clearly, the passage is speaking of things in Revelation that are soon to take place. And context clearly helps the present-day reader to see what was past and what is future... The first century reader knew that 19 and forward is separate from the rest of Revelation... How much separate, they did not know. And neither do we...
BlessedAnomaly
Well-known member
Stop with the theatrics; I've not tried to embarrass you. I've asked simple questions.
I've asked you to comment on Rev 22. You give me a full preterist who says it is all in the past.
You have already stated that you believe Rev 19 is in the future.
I've asked a simple question about those two chapters. Iron sharpens iron -- so it will either strengthen your argument or show it to have tatters and tears.
How long does a vapor last? For this is our lifetime. How much time does a shadow lengthen? For this is our lifetime. God doesn't see "shortly" in the same way that you do.
I've said before, your hermeneutic must last consistently through scripture. IMO, it doesn't. This alone does not end your Preterism, but the use of such time-based language to prove your point simply does not hold up across scripture.
Yodas_Prodigy
Well-known member
I am good with the time texts... Your approach is to create fault that is not there. The Full pret quote was a mistake. I admit. That doesn't remove what I said in the last post.
"The passage says, "the things that must shortly take place." Clearly, the passage is speaking of things in Revelation that are soon to take place. And context clearly helps the present-day reader to see what was past and what is future... The first century reader knew that 19 and forward is separate from the rest of Revelation... How much separate, they did not know. And neither do we..."
As a dispensationalist, you have to fight tooth and nail against anything that increases the likelihood that you are wrong. And yes, you are a dispensationalist...
BlessedAnomaly
Well-known member
I'm not trying to remove your posts. I'm trying to understand them and form a coherent message of your position. There are issues as stated so far (I know you don't agree with that statement, but your use of "shortly" and "soon" is inconsistent). And again, if you say something like "here is where I'm at right now; I have things to work on and understand," then that's fine. But your use of "time" words is inconsistent with other scripture.
You keep saying this and repeating it over and over is not going to make it codify with the other scripture I brought up any better than it did yesterday.
I'm not concerned at the moment with "the rest of Revelation," just 19-22. Chapters 19 thru 22 are a consistent narrative that cannot be sliced and diced apart. If 19 is future, then 22 is future. If you want them both past, then you have issues. I know you don't want both past because you already said 19 is future. But you won't admit that 22 is also future because of that little tiny word "shortly." This makes 19-22 inconsistent in you eschatology.
I'm not a dispensationalist as you would define one.
I'm not fighting to preserve some dispensationalist argument or any subset of dispy thinking. I haven't mentioned my believes in eschatology in this whole discussion. It has ALL been about finding a consistent message from you. Show me in this thread where I've attempted to put Preterism up against Dispensationalism (or anything else).
Actually, not in any classically defined norm. I do share some ideas; others I find kind of dumb. You are probably labelling me simply because of the Church / Israel separation. Not good enough, though. But that is for another discussion, because I have never in this thread attempted to put my eschatology up against yours. I've only asked questions of yours and shown the inconsistency of your answers.
Last edited:
Yodas_Prodigy
Well-known member
OK... Let me try to convince you from a different angle. As I read through Revelation 22, I realized that there are two parts to 22. Context is always important. Just reading one verse or two doesn't necessarily give the true context of the passage. The first part of 22 discusses the River of Life, which I believe is future.
Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2 through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit each month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. 3 No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him. 4 They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5 And night will be no more. They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever.
The second part of 22 reverts back to John in his present looking forward to the coming judgement John wrote of at the beginning of the Revelation. The passage is again stressing the future coming of Christ and his judgement in 70 AD of Israel.
6 And he said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true. And the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place.”
7 “And behold, I am coming soon. Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.”
8 I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed them to me, 9 but he said to me, “You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.”
10 And he said to me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near. 11 Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and the holy still be holy.”
12 “Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”
14 Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. 15 Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.
16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.”
17 The Spirit and the Bride say, “Come.” And let the one who hears say, “Come.” And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price.
18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
20 He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!
21 The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all. Amen.
Yodas_Prodigy
Well-known member
Well, here are the basics of Dispensational thinking (there are variations that have arisen due to failed guesses)
- Israel and the Church are separate groups
- Rapture primarily before the tribulation (of course, there is mid-tribulation and post tribulation.
- 1,000 Year Millenium
- Typically, seven dispensations
- A lengthy gap between week 69 and week 70 of Daniel's prophecy.
I'm sure there are more.
BlessedAnomaly
Well-known member
"Failed guesses?" Hee hee. There are a number of different dispensational teachings, the same as Preterism is not singular.
Most dispy's believe that Israel and the Church will be brought together somewhere in the Millennium. I don't think they will be joined. At least not until post-millenium eternity.
Pre-, Mid- and Post- doesn't really matter. Dispy's have a pre-millennial rapture.
But yes, I believe a pre-millennial rapture.
1,000 .... long time; not a matter.
I don't believe this. It is an artificial manner of cutting up time to teach about different things.
Grace has been around forever. The Church age is from Christ setting up the church onward. They aren't separate.
There isn't an age of Law and an age of Grace. The Law was never what God intended. Grace was, and Grace always has been.
I don't spend a lot of time on the 70 weeks of Daniel.
Different Dispy groups have a different list, from 3 to (if I recall) 8. Some don't have what others do.