Full Preterism and Matthew 24

[disciple]

http://www.ncbf.net/PDF/Matthew_24.pdf

please read and share comments. i particularly want to discuss the implications of what he says and discuss how one would answer the issue of why the prediction of two different events (70 AD and the second coming) would be interspersed so much within the discourse.

[preterist]

I don't pretend to be an expert, but I have read many full-preterist works that could refute all he has said and do so pretty easily. I have even found a post-mill. who teaches the entire Olivet Discourse speaks of the dest. of Jerusalem.

This is the big question for me, can you divide the Olivet Discourse? I haven't found a good enough reason to yet, thus I'm still a full-preterist. Perhaps someday I will.

[Skeuos Eleos]

Preterist, welcome to the forums!

Well, I'm even less of an expert but I think the argument is only one of many as to why the discourse can be 'split' or, rather, read as having significance over a long period of time rather than only a fixed point in time (i.e. 70AD). In fact, I could turn it around and ask:why is it important not to 'split' it, other than a desire to defend a preterist presupposition?

Anyway, I look forward to a refutation of his arguments.

Martin

[wildboar]

Modern day postmillennialism is just inconsistent preterism, so certainly they intepret many passages in the same way. The best book I have seen which adresses the various positions is A Case For Amillennialism by Kim Riddlebarger.

The Amillennial position is that which follows the Biblical pattern of interpretation of prophecy. Prof. Engelsma responds to much the same arguments from postmillennialists:

Matthew 24, 25 is Jesus' answer to the question of His disciples in 24:3. The question was, "When shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?" The question combined the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and the end of the world at Jesus' second coming. Jesus' answer likewise combines these two events. The reason for the combination of these two events in the great discourse by our Lord on the last things (eschatology) is that the destruction of Jerusalem was a historical type of the end of the world.

Throughout Matthew 24:4-31, Jesus gives instruction to His church concerning the end of the world, and the things which the church must expect before the end of the world, under the figure, or type, of the destruction of Jerusalem.

Inasmuch as the destruction of Jerusalem was the type of the end, everything that Jesus has taught in the preceding verses can be said in verse 34 to "be fulfilled," that is, happen, in A.D. 70. "All these things," happen typically in A.D. 70. But these things do not happen in A.D. 70 exhaustively. They do by no means happen in reality in A.D. 70. The reality of all these things will happen when Jesus comes in the body at the end of the world.

It is the same with the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the world as it is with the fulfillment of the other great prophecies of the Scriptures. Balaam's prophecy in Numbers 24:12-25 of the king out of Jacob was fulfilled historically in David, the son of Jesse. The mention of the various heathen nations that the king would subdue shows this. All the things of Balaam's prophecy happened in the life and reign of King David.

But only typically. Not exhaustively. Not as to the reality.

The real happening of these things - the fulfillment - is in the kingship of Jesus Christ.

Similarly, the promise to Abram that his seed would receive the land from the Nile to the Euphrates was typically fulfilled in the glorious kingdom of Solomon (Gen. 15:18; II Chron. 9:26).

But not in reality.

The reality is the present extent of the spiritual kingdom of Jesus Christ, which worldwide kingdom is yet expanding and will be perfected in all the universe at the coming of the Christ.

The peaceful kingdom of Psalm 72 is, throughout the Psalm, both the earthly kingdom under Solomon and the spiritual kingdom of Jesus the Messiah. More precisely, it is the spiritual kingdom of Messiah foreshadowed in the earthly kingdom under Solomon. The Reformed Tradition: Ridderbos and Calvin



This explanation of Matthew 24:1-35 in terms of type/antitype, or figure/reality, is that of the solid Reformed tradition.

Exactly concerning the difficulty, how Jesus could say in Matthew 24:34 that "this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled," the Dutch Reformed exegete Herman Ridderbos wrote:

By "all these things" (rendered by Ridderbos as "dit alles," 'all this' - DJE) ... (is) to be understood ... the entire complex of the happening of the last time, including the coming of the Son of Man. In this connection one must again take into consideration the combining character of the representation of the future set forth here.... The startingpoint of this whole discourse is in the destruction of the temple. And because this, according to the nature of prophecy, is seen in one and the same realm ("in een vlak") with the great future of the Lord, it can be said that the generation which would be witness of this destruction shall not pass "till all these things be fulfilled." Here, therefore, the great future is again designated in a complex, undifferentiated way. In the light of the fulfillment it is evident that "all these things" ("dit alles," according to Ridderbos - DJE) do not come all at once and, therefore, would be seen merely in part by the then living generation.... The exegesis (of Matt. 24 -DJE) must also here adopt the historical viewpoint, that is, must proceed from the prophetic form of eschatology. See also the commentary on 24:14 (The Gospel according to Matthew, vol. 2, Kok, 1954, pp. 157, 158, in Korte Verklaring; the translation of the Dutch is mine).

This was also Calvin's interpretation of Matthew 24:34. Because Calvin's interpretation is both clear and compelling; because it represents the Reformed tradition, indeed, the tradition of the Reformation; and because it destroys the novel interpretation by Kik and the Christian Reconstructionists, it deserves to be quoted in its entirety:

Though Christ employs a general expression, yet he does not extend the discourses to all the miseries which would befall the Church, but merely informs them, that before a single generation shall have been completed, they will learn by experience the truth of what he has said. For within fifty years the city was destroyed and the temple was rased, the whole country was reduced to a hideous desert, and the obstinacy of the world rose up against God. Nay more, their rage was inflamed to exterminate the doctrine of salvation, false teachers arose to corrupt the pure gospel by their impostures, religion sustained amazing shocks, and the whole company of the godly was miserably distressed. Now though the same evils were perpetrated in uninterrupted succession for many ages afterwards, yet what Christ said was true, that, before the close of a single generation, believers would feel in reality, and by undoubted experience, the truth of his prediction; for the apostles endured the same things which we see in the present day. And yet it was not the design of Christ to promise to his followers that their calamities would be terminated within a short time, (for then he would have contradicted himself, having previously warned them that the end was not yet but, in order to encourage them to perseverance, he expressly foretold that those things related to their own age. The meaning therefore is: "This prophecy does not relate to evils that are distant, and which posterity will see after the lapse of many centuries, but which are now hanging over you, and ready to fall in one mass, so that there is no part of it which the present generation will not experience." So then, while our Lord heaps upon a single generation every kind of calamities, he does not by any means exempt future ages from the same kind of sufferings, but only enjoins the disciples to be prepared for enduring them all with firmness (Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, vol.3, tr. William Pringle, Eerdmans, 1949, pp. 151, 152).

Calvin's explanation of the related 14th verse of the chapter ("And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come") is the same. Calvin flatly denies that the reference to the end is exhaustively and exclusively a reference to the destruction of Jerusalem, as is the contention of Kik and the Christian Reconstructionists. Calvin points to the obvious fact that is basic to the right understanding of the entire passage, namely, Jesus' "blending" of the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the world as figure and reality.

This is improperly restricted by some to the destruction of the temple, and the abolition of the service of the Law; for it ought to be understood as referring to the end and renovation of the world. Those two things having been blended by the disciples, as if the temple could not be overthrown without the destruction of the whole world, Christ, in replying to the whole question which had been put to him, reminded them that a long and melancholy succession of calamities was at hand, and that they must not hasten to seize the prize, before they had passed through many contests and dangers. In this manner, therefore, we ought to explain this latter clause: "The end of the world will not come before I have tried my Church, for a long period, by severe and painful temptations" (pp. 129, 130).

The interpretation of Matthew 24:34 by J. Marcellus Kik and the Christian Reconstructionists as demanding that everything set forth in Matthew 24:4-31 took place exhaustively and really in the destruction of Jerusalem is a radical departure from the historic Reformed explanation of the passage.

Standing decisively against J. Marcellus Kik's interpretation of Matthew 24:3-35, particularly verse 34, in his book, An Eschatology of Victory (Presbyterian and Reformed, 1971), are the following considerations drawn from the passage itself.

1) Kik's interpretation ignores that part of the disciples' question that asks about "the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world" (v.3). Again and again in his explanation of Matthew 24:4-31 Kik presents the question that Jesus is answering as though it were only the question, "When shall these things (of the destruction of Jerusalem) be?" Kik begins his treatment of Matthew 24:23-28, e.g., with the words, "The disciples desired to know when the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple would take place." Not surprisingly, Kik immediately adds, "In answer to that question Jesus first gave preliminary signs in verses 4-14." Kik then goes on to make Jesus' words in verses 23-28 also refer only to the destruction of Jerusalem (An Eschatology of Victory, pp. 121, 122).

But the question of the disciples was not only about the destruction of Jerusalem; it "blended," to use Calvin's term, two events: the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the world. In answering the disciples' question, Jesus also "blended" the two events, and He did so from the very outset of His answer. That His answer, already in verses 4-31, had in view, not only the destruction of Jerusalem but also the end of the world at His second coming is indisputably evident both in verse 6 and in verse 14, where He speaks of "the end."

2) Kik's interpretation is forced to make two different comings of Christ out of the (identical) mention of His coming (Greek: parousia) in verse 27 and in verse 37. In accordance with Kik's ironclad rule that everything before verse 34 refers only to the destruction of Jerusalem, the "coming of the Son of man" of verse 27 is only the judgment upon Jerusalem in A.D. 70, whereas the "coming of the Son of man" of verse 37 is His second, bodily coining at the end of the world. This is arbitrary, illegitimate exegesis, violating the canon of biblical interpretation that insists that the same word in the same context must mean the same thing, unless something clearly makes this impossible. Kik's different explanation of "coming" in verse 27 and in verse 37 is especially irresponsible in light of the question of the disciples, "... and what shall be the sign of thy coming...?"

3) Similarly, Kik is forced to explain "angels" in the passage in completely different ways. In verse 31, "angels" have to be preachers of the gospel. But suddenly in verse 36, they are the heavenly spirits. Why? Because to let "angels" be 'angels' in verse 31 would imply that verse 31 is referring to the second coming of Jesus at the end of the world (which it surely is), and this would conflict with Kik's rule that everything preceding verse 34 refers only to the destruction of Jerusalem.

4) Kik's interpretation is demolished by the obvious, incontrovertible references in verses 4-31 to events that take place after the destruction of Jerusalem. Such is the reference in verse 14 to the preaching of the gospel "in all the inhabited earth (Greek: oikoumenee) for a witness to all nations." Such also is the reference in verses 29-31 to the catastrophes in the heavens; the sign of the Son of man; the mourning of all the tribes of the earth; the coming on the clouds of the Son of man, visible to all; and the gathering of the elect from the dead by the angels with the sound of the trumpet. Kik's explanation of these references, indicated earlier, is nothing but allegorizing in order to explain them all away.

5) Kik's interpretation founders on verse 36: "But of that day and hour knoweth no man...." "That day" refers to some "day" that has been the main topic of the entire preceding discourse. This is the "day" of the second, bodily coming of Jesus Christ, as verse 37 makes explicit. Jesus has been setting forth this "day" in verses 4-31, typically in the destruction of Jerusalem and really in His second coming. Kik's thesis, therefore, that Jesus begins to treat His second coming only at verse 36 is shattered by "that day" in verse 36. It is as if Jesus says in verse 36, "That day that you asked about in verse 3 - the day of my second coming at the end of the world, of which the destruction of Jerusalem is a type - and that I have been talking about in verses 4-31 is unknown as regards the exact time of it, except by my Father." 6) The device itself of separating Scripture's treatment of type and reality in a passage by a neat dividing-line, so that everything before the line is type and everything after the line is reality, is artificial. It is wholly foreign to the actual way in which Scripture presents its prophecies, especially its prophecies about the last days. Where in Psalm 2 is the neat dividing-line between David and the Messiah? Where in Psalm 72 is the neat dividing-line between the kingdom of Solomon and the kingdom of Jesus Christ? Where in the book of Revelation is the neat dividing-line between the persecuting Roman empire and the kingdom of the beast, antichrist? Scripture knows of no such neat dividing-lines. It presents its prophecy as one whole, with type and reality interwoven throughout. This is what makes exegesis difficult, as every Reformed minister knows by experience.

[Ivor Thomas]

Preterist I hope you dont mind but between 33ad and 70ad Stephen died was stoned to death where did he go to and what was is state before 70ad, Thanks Ivor Thomas .

[Skeuos Eleos]

Brothers and Sisters in the Lord Jesus Christ and all who are interested in looking into these things,

It seemed good to me to set out some thoughts of my own concerning Mat. 24. I know nothing of the Greek, little about exegesis and hermeneutics and have consulted no commentaries or great theologians. Therefore I do not presume to teach or that this be right, far from it! It is what I believe to be the main teaching of the passage but assuredly, I stand ready to be corrected. I post it hoping that I (and perhaps others reading) might learn and/or that the Lord may use it for the edification of His people.

Comments on Matthew 24
Vv 2 –3 Given the eschatological hopes the disciples would have had as first century Jews, enhanced by their time spent with Jesus who spoke of eternal fire, hell, judgement, eternal life and future glory, it seems most reasonable that they would interpret Jesus' words in v. 2 to be referring to these things. Jesus had already begun to reveal to them that he would be killed (Mat 16) so we see also that they had an expectation of Him coming again and that it was associated with the end of the age. There are two aspects to their question when and what will be the sign. The second half of the question demonstrates a desire to be sure that they would recognise it - that knowledge of the time alone might not be enough. This is unsurprising given how many things Jesus’ had already taught them that they had previously misunderstood!

However, Jesus’ only response to “when will these things happen” was to say that it will come unexpectedly – this to encourage His people to live with this expectancy and hope – particularly in light of the coming persecution. As to what will be the sign, that is the main thrust of His response – tribulation and apostasy. Yet, the end is not a sudden event in a short space of time as the disciples might have supposed but will take place over a long period of time, the first sign of it being the wars, rumours of wars, earthquakes and famine in various places (i.e. not just Jerusalem) – such things should not frighten Jesus’ disciples because the end is “not yet”, these things being only the birth pangs showing (i.e. a ‘sign’) that the end is coming.

“Then they will deliver you to tribulation”, these birth pangs will then lead to a time of persecution and apostasy this, in turn, leads to the preaching of the gospel “in the whole world and then the end will come”. The tribulation and apostasy and the preaching of the gospel in the whole world are further signs of Jesus’ second coming.

The main purpose of Jesus’ response is to warn of the coming trials, to give encouragement for those trials and to teach His people how to live in light of this knowledge – i.e. not to be concerned with material things but to be ready, on the ‘alert’.

In my view then, the destruction of the temple in 70AD, if this be what the ‘abomination of desolation’ is referring to, is mentioned as a sign to mark the beginning of the tribulation and apostasy which would last until the time of His return.

The significance of the destruction of the temple itself is not to do with Jesus' return but with graphically marking the final end of the old covenant era, with its types and shadows and physical temple, and marking the final step in the initiation of the new covenant era with the spiritual antitypes and realities. This is an age which would be marked out (perhaps even increasingly so) by tribulation, persecution, aspostasy and deceivers and yet, amidst all this, a gospel which would be preached to the whole world and a people who would be alert, not concerned with the things of this world but looking forward to His return and, thus who would endure to the end.

This, I believe, is the main thrust of what is being taught.

To ignore the similarity between Jesus’ words in chapter 24 and the extensive history of apostasy and persecution in the church since AD70 would be no different than failing to see a connection between Jesus’ words in v. 2 and events in AD70. You can't have it both ways: its both or neither!

I think we can start to go wrong right from verse 2 if we think the reason for Jesus mentioning the destruction of the temple is to describe the final eschaton. I suggest His comment was designed to trigger His explanation of the coming new global gospel age that would lead up to His final return, not to emphasize some eschatological significance of the destruction of the temple. The disciples question in response to Jesus' comment was, perhaps in part, selfishly concerned with their own safety (as we are all prone to be) but Jesus' response, whilst answering their questions, deals with the more important matter of the initiation of the new kingdom age, the spreading of the gospel and the comfort of His people until that time. This new kingdom age would consist of an advancing spiritual kingdom in spite of the increasing persecution and apostasy against that kingdom in the physical realm.


Some further thoughts on the end of the old covenant era and the ushering in of the new covenant era prompted by the passage:

• Under the old covenant the difference between those who are chosen by God and those who are not was marked out by race, under the new covenant it was to be marked out by tribulation and desertion.
  
• Under the old covenant worship was in a physical temple in Jerusalem, under the new covenant, a temple is no longer needed, and, as believers are scattered as they flee the persecution and preach the gospel, so worship will take place around the world.
  
• In old covenant worship, hope of final salvation was maintained through the offering of continual sacrifices. In the new covenant, the destruction of the temple graphically illustrates the forsaking (desolation) of this old way. Instead hope is maintained in the believers heart by a knowledge of the returning King.

Ok, I’m starting to digress here - this is certainly not an attempt at exegesis, merely some thoughts that were prompted as I reflected upon the passage.

This is what I believe. If it be right may God be glorified and His people rejoice in it. If it be wrong then may I learn the truth in earnest.

By the way, since I have not studied eschatology, if someone could tell me what ‘camp’ this puts me I’d be grateful!

Martin

[preterist]

Preterist I hope you dont mind but between 33ad and 70ad Stephen died was stoned to death where did he go to and what was is state before 70ad, Thanks Ivor Thomas

I believe he went to Hades where the OT saints were. However Paul said " to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord" so that seems to indicate He went to heaven. So I'm not certain about either position.

[Robert R. Higby]

Martin, you are quite profound for a 'new scholar'!

When viewed correctly, no 'split' OR 'full preterest' interpretation of Mt. 24 is necessary to understand that 70 A.D. is not all that is in view. In fact, such interpretations are strained. Full Preterism would deny the cosmic nature of final redemption. For me, Paul in 1 Cor. 15:19-28 gives the ultimate and final argument that is the death-knell of hyper-Preterism.

The 'beginnings of sorrows' (Mt. 24:8) certainly occurred in the time of those to whom Christ spoke. But that is the end of it for them. Verses 9-28 obviously apply to all peoples since then. There is no ONE time that this admonition applies to; it appies to every age. The great tribulation spans the entire era between the apostolic age and Christ's final return. Verse 33 exhorts us that Christ's return is to be viewed as 'near' throughout this entire period, but verse 36 is equally clear that no one can be sure of Christ's final return in his/her own lifetime.

Martin:
Yet, the end is not a sudden event in a short space of time as the disciples might have supposed but will take place over a long period of time,

The conclusion in Christ's parable in Mt. 25:19 ('after a long time') supports your conclusion. To say that the early believers could be absolutely certain of his final return in their day goes against the very principle outlined in Christ's teaching here. 'This generation' means RACE or a COMMUNITY OF PEOPLE, not 'every person living right now.'

[Ivor Thomas]

I believe he went to Hades where the OT saints were. However Paul said " to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord" so that seems to indicate He went to heaven. So I'm not certain about either position.

Thank you for your reply as a full Preterist you should know the state according to your doctrine of the ones after 70ad could you explain to me the difference if any in Stephen the state before 70ad and explain his state after. Thanks Ivor Thomas.

[disciple]

Modern day postmillennialism is just inconsistent preterism, so certainly they intepret many passages in the same way. The best book I have seen which adresses the various positions is A Case For Amillennialism by Kim Riddlebarger.

The Amillennial position is that which follows the Biblical pattern of interpretation of prophecy. Prof. Engelsma responds to much the same arguments from postmillennialists:

the quotes you provided remind me of stuff i read by caird in his "language and imagery of the bible." here is a quote:

"Language and Imagery of the Bible", G.B. Caird, pp. 256-260

1. The biblical writers believed literally that the world had had a beginning in the past and would have an end in the future

2. They regularly used end-of-the-world language metaphorically to refer to that which they well knew was not the end of the world.

3. As with all other uses of metaphor, we have to allow for the likelihood of some literalist misinterpretation on the part of the hearer, and for the possibility of some blurring of the edges between vehicle and tenor on the part of the speaker.

Proposition 1 is easily established for the OT. It is implied in such phrases as 'until the moon is no more' (Ps. 72:7) and in the ancient promise to Noah (Gen 8:22). In some passages it is explicitly stated (Ps 102:25-26; Isa 51:6, 54:10)...

Our first problem arises when we try to decide whether the expressions 'the latter end of the days' (Gen 49:1; Num 24:14; Deut 4:30, 31:29; Hos 3:5; Isa 2:2; Jer 23:20, 30:24, 48:47, 49:39; Ez 38:16; Dan 2:28, 10:14) and 'the day of the Lord' (Amos 5:18, 20; Isa 2:12, 13:6, 9; Zeph 1:7, 14; Jer 46:10; Ez 13:5, 30:3; Obad 15; Zech 14:1; Mal 4:5; Joel 1:15, 2:1, 11, 31, 3:14) are eschatological in this plenary sense. For the first of these phrases the Hebrew dictionary of Brown, Driver and Briggs gives the following definition: 'a prophetic phrase denoting the final period of the history so far as the speaker's perspective reaches.' It is thus the equivalent of the English expressions 'in the end' or 'ultimately' when we use them to mean 'sooner or later' or 'in the future'; and it has precisely that vagueness which makes for the blurring of the edges mentinoed in Preposition 3. The origins of the phrase 'the day of the Lord' are as yet obscure and conjectural. When it is first used in the eighth century B.C. by Amos, it clearly has a long history behind it. His contemporaries who long for it regard it as a day of Yahweh's victory in which they will share, and Amos warns them that it will be Yahweh's victory over them. What is not in doubt is that the day came to be described in terms of cosmic disaster, as the return of primaeval chaos, and so by imaginative elision to be seen as the end of the world.

In thirteen of the eighteen instances of its occurrence, the day of the Lord is said to be either imminent or present. It is here that Preposition 2 comes to our aid. For when we examine the contexts, we find that in one case the referent is the overthrow of Babylon, in another the annihilation of Edom, in another the ravaging of Judah by a plague of locuts...The day was his victory, when he would come decisively for salvation and judgment, and they were inviting their hearers to see that day in the current crisis. In other words they were using the term as a metaphor...

The book of Joel provides an interesting study in what we might call prophetic camera technique. The book opens with some close-up shots of a locust swarm overrunning the countryside. Then the scene changes to the temple, where priests and elders are instructed to proclaim a national fast in recognition that the calamity is God's judgment (Joel 1:15). The prophet says that he day is 'near', because that is the traditional word to use about the day of the Lord, but what he means by it is that it has arrived. Any possible doubt about this is rapidly dispelled (Joel 2:1-2).

But this local manifestation of God's judgment has the power to call the nation to repentance because it is seen as an anticipation and embodiment of the universal judgment to come. So the foreground scene fades into a telephoto panorama of all nations gathered in the Valley of the Lord's Judgment (Joel 3:14).

Few would hesitate to call this an eschatological vision, yet it is not the end: the effect of this judgment is not to determine the destiny of individuals in some after-life, but to 'reverse the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem' (3:1), so that afterwards 'there shall be people living in Judah forever, in Jerusalem generation after generation.' (3:21)

Thus the nearness of the day is given both a short range and a long range application, and it is of some significance for the interpretation of Mark 1:15 that in the short range 'is near' is synonymous with 'has arrived'.(Lam 4:18) On the other hand the long range vision is introduced by two quite vague indications of time, 'a day will come' (2:28) and 'when that time comes' (3:1), so that the proclamation that the day has now arrived for the multitudes of all nations tells us nothing whatever about its date.

[InChristAlways]

Wild Boar

Modern day postmillennialism is just inconsistent preterism, so certainly they intepret many passages in the same way. The best book I have seen which adresses the various positions is A Case For Amillennialism by Kim Riddlebarger.

The Amillennial position is that which follows the Biblical pattern of interpretation of prophecy. Prof. Engelsma responds to much the same arguments from postmillennialists:

Bill T

When viewed correctly, no 'split' OR 'full preterest' interpretation of Mt. 24 is necessary to understand that 70 A.D. is not all that is in view. In fact, such interpretations are strained. Full Preterism would deny the cosmic nature of final redemption. For me, Paul in 1 Cor. 15:19-28 gives the ultimate and final argument that is the death-knell of hyper-Preterism.

Hi Bill. Actually, that is the death-knell of "Partial Preterism/futurism" as it appears Revelation chapt 14 is actually the reaping of the elect "sheep" and the destruction of the "goats".
Also, how can the "captured" beast and false prophet be thrown into the lake of fire in chapt 19 without being judged at the "white throne" first? [that is a different topic though]Blessings in the Lord Jesus.

1 corin 15:20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, [and] has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man [came] death, by Man also [came] the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order:

Christ the firstfruits, [Reve 12:5 She bore a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron. And her Child was caught up to God and His throne.]

afterward those [who are] Christ's at His coming. [Reve 14:14 Then I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and on the cloud sat [One] like the Son of Man, having on His head a golden crown, and in His hand a sharp sickle.]


24 Then [comes] the end, [Reve 14:17 Then another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle. 19 So the angel thrust his sickle into the earth and gathered the vine of the earth, and threw [it] into the great winepress of the wrath of God.]Note:Isaiah 5 in the OT which is wrath on Daniel's people I believe.


when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy [that] will be destroyed [is] death.

http://newjerusalemministriesboards.com/index.php?

[Robert R. Higby]

Oh, sorry. Let me make myself clear, I AM NEITHER A FULL OR PARTIAL PRETERIST, I believe that ALL Preterism is renegade interpretation of prophecy! So instead of referring to 'full' or 'pure' preterism, I should probably refer to 'PRETERISM'.

I am a historicist. I fully believe that THIS GENERATION referred to by Christ was not a physical generation that was extinct once the people standing before him were dead, but the EVIL AND ADULTEROLUS GENERATION or race that had come to fruition in his time. This generation of wickedness and wicked men will continue to the very end.

[InChristAlways]

Oh, sorry. Let me make myself clear, I AM NEITHER A FULL OR PARTIAL PRETERIST, I believe that ALL Preterism is renegade interpretation of prophecy! So instead of referring to 'full' or 'pure' preterism, I should probably refer to 'PRETERISM'.

I am a historicist. I fully believe that THIS GENERATION referred to by Christ was not a physical generation that was extinct once the people standing before him were dead, but the EVIL AND ADULTEROLUS GENERATION or race that had come to fruition in his time. This generation of wickedness and wicked men will continue to the very end.

HI BT. I understand brother as there are really multitudes of views. I don't think I will see the end of wickedness in my lifetime, but then one never knows. I am kind of a "historicist" myself in some way maybe.

I see the "white throne" as the same event as the 6th seal, one view from heaven and one view from earth. Not many do, but I believe revelation is about "Daniel's" OC people. To me, it is almost like Exodus, with the jewish religious rulers becoming like "Pharoah". I view the 70 weeks of Daniel differently than most also.
I just love studying scripture and use the OT mainly for revelation. You are welcome just to visit our forum where I post most of my studies on revelation. Blessings.

Exodus 2:23 Now it happened in the process of time that the king of Egypt died. Then the children of Israel groaned because of the bondage, and they cried out; and their cry came up to God because of the bondage.

Matthew 23:1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, 2 saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. 3 "Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, [that] observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do. 4 "For they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay [them] on men's shoulders;........ 38 "See! Your house is left to you desolate; 39 "for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, 'Blessed [is] He who comes in the name of the LORD!' "

Revelation 11:1 Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying, "Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship there.

Luke 21:21 "Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 "For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

zech 14:4 And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, Which faces Jerusalem on the east. And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two, From east to west, [Making] a very large valley; Half of the mountain shall move toward the north And half of it toward the south. 5 Then you shall flee [through] My mountain valley, For the mountain valley shall reach to Azal. Yes, you shall flee As you fled from the earthquake In the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Thus the LORD my God will come, [And] all the saints with You.

Romans 13:11 And [do] this, knowing the time, that now [it is] high time to awake out of sleep; for now our salvation [is] nearer than when we [first] believed.

One of the most awsome events in the bible to me!!! I can almost see this as symbolically like the splitting of the Mt of Olives in Zech 14. But then that is just me.

Exodus 14:13 And Moses said to the people, "Do not be afraid. Stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD, which He will accomplish for you today. For the Egyptians whom you see today, you shall see again no more forever. 14 "The LORD will fight for you, and you shall hold your peace." 16 "But lift up your rod, and stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it. And the children of Israel shall go on dry [ground] through the midst of the sea. 17 "And I indeed will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall follow them. So I will gain honor over Pharaoh and over all his army, his chariots, and his horsemen. 18 "Then the Egyptians shall know that I [am] the LORD, when I have gained honor for Myself over Pharaoh, his chariots, and his horsemen." 19 And the Angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, moved and went behind them; and the pillar of cloud went from before them and stood behind them. 20 So it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel. Thus it was a cloud and darkness [to the one,] and it gave light by night [to the other,] so that the one did not come near the other all that night. 21 Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the LORD caused the sea to go [back] by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea into dry [land,] and the waters were divided.

[InChristAlways]

Originally Posted by BillTwisse
Oh, sorry. Let me make myself clear, I AM NEITHER A FULL OR PARTIAL PRETERIST, I believe that ALL Preterism is renegade interpretation of prophecy! So instead of referring to 'full' or 'pure' preterism, I should probably refer to 'PRETERISM'.

I am a historicist. I fully believe that THIS GENERATION referred to by Christ was not a physical generation that was extinct once the people standing before him were dead, but the EVIL AND ADULTEROLUS GENERATION or race that had come to fruition in his time. This generation of wickedness and wicked men will continue to the very end.

Hi BT. Both righteous and wicked, correct?
I have no arguement with that, as I only see 2 men alive on this earth today, "OC Adam/LAW" and NC Christ/SPIRIT. Pretty simple to me brother. Guess we just have to wait for the Lord to "Shake things up a bit" Blessings

Hebrew 12:25 See that you do not refuse Him who speaks. For if they did not escape who refused Him who spoke on earth, much more [shall we not escape] if we turn away from Him who [speaks] from heaven, 26 whose voice then shook the earth; but now He has promised, saying, "Yet once more I SHAKE not only the Earth, but also Heaven." 27 Now this, "Yet once more," indicates the REMOVAL of those things that are being SHAKEN, as of things that are made, that the things which cannot be SHAKEN may REMAIN. 28 Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom which cannot be SHAKEN, let us have grace, by which we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear. 29 For our God [is] a consuming fire.

Reve 16:17 Then the seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and a loud voice came out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, "It is done!" 18 And there were noises and thunderings and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such a mighty and great earthquake as had not occurred since men were on the earth.

[InChristAlways]

Originally Posted by BillTwisse
Oh, sorry. Let me make myself clear, I AM NEITHER A FULL OR PARTIAL PRETERIST, I believe that ALL Preterism is renegade interpretation of prophecy! So instead of referring to 'full' or 'pure' preterism, I should probably refer to 'PRETERISM'.

I am a historicist. I fully believe that THIS GENERATION referred to by Christ was not a physical generation that was extinct once the people standing before him were dead, but the EVIL AND ADULTEROLUS GENERATION or race that had come to fruition in his time. This generation of wickedness and wicked men will continue to the very end.

Hi BT. I am of the of the Present/Continuing view so I don't really know what word to put on that LOL.I just read and study Scripture for my own present age and living in Christ daily and I do love the Bible.[I never was a "history buff"]

Anyway, here was a conversation between a "preterist" and Dispy futurist about the "last trumpet. The Olivet Discourse does concern Israel and Paul does use completely different "language" than Jesus used, at least as far as the "consummation/resurrection" and why it was said his letters were "hard to grasp/understand.

Acts 9:15 But the Lord said to him, "Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles/Nations, kings, and the children of Israel.

Isaiah 60:3 The Gentiles shall come to your light, And kings to the brightness of your rising.

It appears the "last trumpet" in Paul are for the NT Christians while the trumpet in Matt 24 is for Israel according to the "Dispy". http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...ad.php?t=60384

Quote: Originally posted by Unpastorized
I tried to get answers before about the rapture and got none. But i can see from reading different threads there are those who say they believe in the rapture. Can you rapturist answer 1 simple question about the LAST trumpet?

MATTHEW 24 [29]Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: [30] And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. [31] And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.


1COR.15 [50] Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.[51] Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,[52] In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.[53] For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.[54] So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

LOOK, a trumpet blowing. AFTER the tribulation. Now if the LAST TRUMPET was blown in 1Cor. and you rapturist say its before the trib or in the middle of the trib, why is a trumpet being blown in Matthew after the tribulation.

Quote Dispy Futurist:

Paul is referring to the "trumpet blast" theme in the OT. A trumpet blast (or a final blast in a series of trumpet blasts) signaled the time that God's people would experience the victory promised them (see Joshua 6:16 for example). Paul was using this theme to show that the Christian is presently embattled in spiritual warfare and our final victory awaits the return of the Lord.

Allusion to the same "trumpet blast" theme is seen in Matthew 24:31, but that event concerns Israel.

-Tim

[InChristAlways]

857

Revelation 11:1 Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying, "Rise and measure the sanctuary of God, the altar, and those who worship there. 2 "But the court/palace that is without the sanctuary, cast out outside, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the city, the holy underfoot [for] forty-two months [reve 13].

Matt 24:30 "Then the Sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven [Reve 14?], and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Mancoming on the clouds of heaven[Reve 19?] with power and great glory. 31 "And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Reve 14:14 Then I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and on the cloud sat [One] like the Son of Man, having on His head a golden crown, and in His hand a sharp sickle.

I have a question, and since I can't start a thread, I thought I would use this one. I do look at revelation as past, present, future and ongoing.

Are Paul's Day of the Lord prohecies in conjunction with Daniel 11/12 and the Olivet Discourse or are they seperate? On other forums, some say the Olivet Discourse was against the jews in Jeruasalem, but Paul's prophecies/revelation are for the whole world.

That "1000yr period" period is actually the most perplexing to me, in light of what Peter, James, Jude and Paul said about the Day of God/the Lord.
What I am asking is, are Paul's Day of the Lord/God prophecies in conjunction with all the OT Day of the Lord prophecies in the Bible, or are there multiple Day of the Lord's. I ask this out of a sincere seeking of the Truth in Scriptures. Thanks.

Peter 3:12 looking for and hastening the coming[#3952] of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat?

3952 parousia par-oo-see'-ah from the present participle of 3918; a being near, i.e. advent (often, return; specially, of Christ to punish Jerusalem, or finally the wicked); (by implication) physically, aspect:--coming, presence

2 Thessalonians 2:8 Andthen the lawless one will be revealed[#601], whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness[#2015] of His coming[#3952].

2015 epiphaneia ep-if-an'-i-ah from 2016; a manifestation, i.e. (specially) the advent of Christ (past or future):--appearing, brightness. 2016 epiphanes ep-if-an-ace' from 2014; conspicuous, i.e. (figuratively) memorable:--notable. 2014 epiphaino ep-ee-fah'-ee-no from 1909 and 5316; to shine upon, i.e. become (literally) visible or (figuratively) known:--appear, give light.

2 Timothy 4:1 I charge[#1263] [you] therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge[#2919] the living and the dead at His appearing/brightness[#2015] and His kingdom[#932]: 8 Finally, there is laid[#606] up for me the crown[#4375] of righteousness[#1343], which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that Day, and not to me only but also to all who have loved His appearing/brightenss[#2015].

Notice the judgement "THRONE"?

Reve 6:16 and said to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the Face of Him who sits on the Throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 "For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?"

[lionovjudah]

I Cron 1:4

AND 2nd kings 3:7

There is the answer

And perhaps Nahum 1:4

[InChristAlways]

That "1000yr period" period is actually the most perplexing to me, in light of what Peter, James, Jude and Paul said about the Day of God/the Lord.
What I am asking is, are Paul's Day of the Lord/God prophecies in conjunction with all the OT Day of the Lord prophecies in the Bible, or are there multiple Day of the Lord's. I ask this out of a sincere seeking of the Truth in Scriptures. Thanks.

Peter 3:12 looking for and hastening the coming[#3952] of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat?

2 Timothy 4:1 I charge[#1263] [you] therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge[#2919] the living and the dead at His appearing/brightness[#2015] and His kingdom[#932]: 8 Finally, there is laid[#606] up for me the crown[#4375] of righteousness[#1343], which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that Day, and not to me only but also to all who have loved His appearing/brightenss[#2015].

Notice the judgement "THRONE"?

Reve 6:16 and said to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the Face of Him who sits on the Throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 "For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?"

I Cron 1:4

AND 2nd kings 3:7

There is the answer

And perhaps Nahum 1:4

Thanks Joe.
I guess what I am asking is, is the destruction of "Babylon", the beast and false prophet a different endtime event than in chapt 20 or the same "symbolical" event with chapt 20 being a "summary".
Another words, what is your view of the 2 "endtime" events in revelation? [Dan 12/Ezekiel 38/39 Reve 16/19] would have to happen "twice", which is possible I suppose. Thanks.

Reve 20:7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number [is] as the sand of the sea. 9 They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured/ate [#2719] them.

2719 katesthio kat-es-thee'-o from 2596 and 2068 (including its alternate); to eat down, i.e. devour (literally or figuratively):--devour.

Reve 19:17 Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, "Come and gather together for the supper [#1173] of the great God, 18 "that you may eat [#5315] the flesh of kings,

5315 phago fag'-o a primary verb (used as an alternate of 2068 in certain tenses); to eat (literally or figuratively):--eat, meat.

Revelation 11:5 And if anyone wants to harm them, fire proceeds from their mouth and devours/ate up [2719] their enemies. And if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this manner.

[red stars denote words used in revelation also]

2 Thessalonians 2: 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 Whose coming [#3952] is according to the working [#1753] of *Satan, in all power {* #1411] and signs [* #4592], and wondurous [#5059] falsehood/lies [ *#5579]

[lionovjudah]

Hab 2:19Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach! Behold, it [is] laid over with gold and silver, and [there is] no breath at all in the midst of it.

[InChristAlways]

Hab 2:19Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach! Behold, it [is] laid over with gold and silver, and [there is] no breath [#7307] at all in the midst of it.

Hi Joe. Nice verse

Perhaps this could symbolize a "type" of altar or sanctuary?

Revelation 13:15 He was granted [power] to give breath/spirit [#4151] to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed.

pneuma (Strong's 4151) occurs 385 times in 350 verses:

1 Kings 13:2 Then he cried out against the altar by the word of the LORD, and said, "O altar, altar! Thus says the LORD: 'Behold, a child, Josiah by name, shall be born to the house of David; and on you he shall sacrifice the priests of the high places who burn incense on you, and men's bones shall be burned on you.' "

Malachi 1:7 "[You] offer defiled food on My altar. But say, 'In what way have we defiled You?' By saying, 'The table of the LORD is contemptible.'

Matt 23:17 "Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gold or the sanctuary that sanctifies the gold? 18 "And, 'Whoever swears by the altar, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gift that is on it, he is obliged [to perform it.']

Revelation 11:1 Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying, "Rise and measure the sanctuary of God, the altar, and those who worship there. 2 "But the court/palace that is without the sanctuary, cast out outside, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the city, the holy underfoot [for] forty-two months [reve 13].