ECT MADist thought for the day

Status
Not open for further replies.

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Everyone knows preterism is not scriptural either.

Depends on what degree of preterism you are talking about.

If you believe the temple destroyed in 70AD was a fulfillment of Matt 24, then you are a partial preterist.

Christ has not yet returned.

He will come again, but He did come in judgment in 70AD

Satan is not bound and sealed over in the pit.

Satan is bound right now. He was bound in 70AD. Prior to 70AD satan roamed the planet like a lion looking for prey to devour.

The nations still learn war.

Not in the kingdom
 

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Depends on what degree of preterism you are talking about.

If you believe the temple destroyed in 70AD was a fulfillment of Matt 24, then you are a partial preterist.

No. any kind of preterism is evil because it distorts scripture.



He will come again, but He did come in judgment in 70AD

No. He sent the Roman army.



Satan is bound right now. He was bound in 70AD. Prior to 70AD satan roamed the planet like a lion looking for prey to devour.

Read the papers. There are no verses in the Bible showing that satan was bound in any way in AD 70. The best could be said that satan lost his prize victims and then continued on to capture the descendants of the early church and form the NT counterpart called the RCC.

Satan is still doing his work today.



Not in the kingdom

The nations presently are not in the Kingdom. The time will come when the only nations and their members left will be in the Kingdom when they will not learn war.--

Isa 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
Isa 2:3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
Isa 2:4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

LA
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Yes! 2Peter 3 is definitely about the end of this present age and the Second Coming of Jesus and not about 70 AD.
Just as the flood ended "the world that then was" so shall there be a consumation of this present world.

Nope

It was the end of the age in 70AD. The "age" was the Old Covenant.

(1 John 2:18) Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.

1 John was written around the same time as 2 Peter.

It takes a lot of scripture twisting to claim "this is the last hour" and "This is how we know it is the last hour" was really 1,900+ years and counting into the future.

Why would John say "THIS IS THE LAST HOUR" if it was really 1,900+ years away?
 

steko

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Nope

It was the end of the age in 70AD. The "age" was the Old Covenant.

(1 John 2:18) Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.

1 John was written around the same time as 2 Peter.

It takes a lot of scripture twisting to claim "this is the last hour" and "This is how we know it is the last hour" was really 1,900+ years and counting into the future.

Why would John say "THIS IS THE LAST HOUR" if it was really 1,900+ years away?

There's lots of opinions and commentators.
I'll take John Gill's comment on it over yours, thankyou.
It seems more reasonable.


"1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time,.... Or hour; not of the Jewish civil and church state, for that had been at an end for some time; this epistle was written some years after the destruction of Jerusalem; nor the last hour of the Gospel dispensation, or world to come, for this was but the first age of that; and much less the last hour of time, or of the present world itself, for that has been many hundreds of years since; but the last hour of the apostolic age. All the apostles were now dead, John was the last of them; perilous times were now coming on, impostors and heretics were rising apace, against which the apostle cautions his little children; and so still he writes to them, agreeably to their age and character, who, being such, were most likely to be imposed upon by those who lie in wait to deceive."-John Gill
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
No. any kind of preterism is evil because it distorts scripture.

Jesus said the temple would be destroyed, and not one stone would be left standing. He told His audience that "THIS GENERATION" would see it.

In 70AD the temple was destroyed, not one stone was left standing, and some who were alive in 30AD that Jesus spoke to were still alive when it happened.

Anyone who believes this simple truth is a preterist.

No. He sent the Roman army.

Correct, the Roman army was part of His coming.

There are no verses in the Bible showing that satan was bound in any way in AD 70.

That's because all of the Bible was written before 70AD

The best could be said that satan lost his prize victims and then continued on to capture the descendants of the early church and form the NT counterpart called the RCC.

Nope, satan has been bound since 70AD. No longer are the nations deceived. The gospel has been preached to every creature under the sun in every nation.

Satan is still doing his work today.

Nope, he has been bound.

The nations presently are not in the Kingdom. The time will come when the only nations and their members left will be in the Kingdom when they will not learn war.--

Where is the Apostle Paul right now?
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
"1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time,.... Or hour; not of the Jewish civil and church state, for that had been at an end for some time; this epistle was written some years after the destruction of Jerusalem; nor the last hour of the Gospel dispensation,-John Gill

There is no proof whatsoever that 1 John was written after 70AD

John Gill totally made it up.
 

steko

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Why not just believe what John wrote?

John said "this is the last hour".


A.T. Robertson makes good sense, too!

"1 John 2:18
It is the last hour (eschatē hōra estin). This phrase only here in N.T., though John often uses hōra for a crisis (Joh_2:4; Joh_4:21, Joh_4:23; Joh_5:25, Joh_5:28, etc.). It is anarthrous here and marks the character of the “hour.” John has seven times “the last day” in the Gospel. Certainly in 1Jo_2:28 John makes it plain that the parousia might come in the life of those then living, but it is not clear that here he definitely asserts it as a fact. It was his hope beyond a doubt. We are left in doubt about this “last hour” whether it covers a period, a series, or the final climax of all just at hand"-Robertson's Word Pictures
 

steko

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
There is no proof whatsoever that 1 John was written after 70AD

John Gill totally made it up.

You're just one more commentator, though less widely known.
Why should I believe your commentary over someone elses?
 

Bright Raven

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
A.T. Robertson makes good sense, too!

"1 John 2:18
It is the last hour (eschatē hōra estin). This phrase only here in N.T., though John often uses hōra for a crisis (Joh_2:4; Joh_4:21, Joh_4:23; Joh_5:25, Joh_5:28, etc.). It is anarthrous here and marks the character of the “hour.” John has seven times “the last day” in the Gospel. Certainly in 1Jo_2:28 John makes it plain that the parousia might come in the life of those then living, but it is not clear that here he definitely asserts it as a fact. It was his hope beyond a doubt. We are left in doubt about this “last hour” whether it covers a period, a series, or the final climax of all just at hand"-Robertson's Word Pictures

If he didn't accept Gil, he won't accept Robinson.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
And who says so?

Heb 1:2 tells us that the life of Christ was "the last days"

(Heb 1:2) but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son,

In Acts 2, Peter quotes Joel and tells those on the Day of Pentecost that they were in the "last days"

About 30-35 years later John uses the term "last hour"

IOW, the NT goes from "last days" to "last hour" the closer it gets to 70AD

It makes no sense for John to say "last days" after 70AD
 

Bright Raven

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Heb 1:2 tells us that the life of Christ was "the last days"

(Heb 1:2) but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son,

In Acts 2, Peter quotes Joel and tells those on the Day of Pentecost that they were in the "last days"

About 30-35 years later John uses the term "last hour"

IOW, the NT goes from "last days" to "last hour" the closer it gets to 70AD

It makes no sense for John to say "last days" after 70AD

Matthew spoke of the last days. Why not use his example?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top