ARCHIVE: The "Great tribulation" and the Testimony of the Early Church Fathers

[Jerry Shugart]

Originally posted by smilax
John iii, 18: "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

By your logic, when Christ came, the dispensation of grace was already over.

smilax,

Too bad you didn´t read the rest of the gospel of John BEFORE you put your foot in your mouth.Becuse if you did you would see that although the unbeliever is now "condemned",he still has a chance to hear the gospel and become saved.The Lord Jesus states in no uncertain terms that his failure to believe will not be judged until THE LAST DAY:

"And if any man hear My words,and believe not,I JUDGE HIM NOT;for I came,not to judge the world but to save the world.

"He that rejecteth Me,and receiveth not My words,hath one that judgeth him:the word that I have spoken,the same SHALL JUDGE HIM IN THE LAST DAY"(Jn.12:47,48).

If Dee Dee is right that the Lord Jesus is NOW judging the nations,then it is obvious that we must now be in the LAST DAY.But is that possible?

Well,the Lord says that it is the LAST DAY when He will raise the dead (Jn.6:40).Has that event come to pass yet?

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[Faramir]

Crickets Chirpping

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart


smilax,

Too bad you didn´t read the rest of the gospel of John BEFORE you put your foot in your mouth.Becuse if you did you would see that although the unbeliever is now "condemned",he still has a chance to hear the gospel and become saved.The Lord Jesus states in no uncertain terms that his failure to believe will not be judged until THE LAST DAY:

"And if any man hear My words,and believe not,I JUDGE HIM NOT;for I came,not to judge the world but to save the world.

"He that rejecteth Me,and receiveth not My words,hath one that judgeth him:the word that I have spoken,the same SHALL JUDGE HIM IN THE LAST DAY"(Jn.12:47,48).

If Dee Dee is right that the Lord Jesus is NOW judging the nations,then it is obvious that we must now be in the LAST DAY.But is that possible?

Well,the Lord says that it is the LAST DAY when He will raise the dead (Jn.6:40).Has that event come to pass yet?

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[smilax]

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
Too bad you didn´t read the rest of the gospel of John BEFORE you put your foot in your mouth.Becuse if you did you would see that although the unbeliever is now "condemned",he still has a chance to hear the gospel and become saved.

I believe that holds as well with the present judgment of the nations.

The Lord Jesus states in no uncertain terms that his failure to believe will not be judged until THE LAST DAY:

And yet He also said that they are already condemned! It's one of those already/not yet things. Positional, but not realized.

"And if any man hear My words,and believe not,I JUDGE HIM NOT;for I came,not to judge the world but to save the world.

"He that rejecteth Me,and receiveth not My words,hath one that judgeth him:the word that I have spoken,the same SHALL JUDGE HIM IN THE LAST DAY"(Jn.12:47,48).

If Dee Dee is right that the Lord Jesus is NOW judging the nations,then it is obvious that we must now be in the LAST DAY.But is that possible?

I don't think anyone believes we are in the last day, which would be a reference to the resurrection. Again, just as our salvation is inaugurated but not consummated, so is the judgment of non-believers.

Well,the Lord says that it is the LAST DAY when He will raise the dead (Jn.6:40).Has that event come to pass yet?

Absolutely not! On which point, I'm glad we agree.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
It would be dumb if what Smilax was saying he was advocating. He is not. He is applying Jerry's logic to that verse, that is all, and demonstrating that Jerry's point was inane which he demonstrated quite nicely.

Dee Dee,

Perhaps you will explain why we should believe you when you say that the Lord is NOW judging the nations when the Lord Himself states that the judgment will not happen until the last day.(see above post)

Of course,perhaps you do not have time or you cannot find your files or you will find one of your million reasons as an excuse for not answering.

I am beginning to see why all the preterists seem to be allergic to Scriptures.Every time that they actually stick their neks out and actually use Scripture they only prove that they do not understand its meaning.

Now you said that smilax was applying my logic to that verse.But that was not my logic at all.My logic is based on what Scripture actually says,and not on someone else´s misunderstanding of what some Scriptual passage says.

And smilax did not prove that my comment was "inane",but his words,as well as yours,prove that neither one of you understand in the slightest the meassage of reconcilation:

"To wit,that God was in Christ reconciling the world into Himself,NOT IMPUTING THEIR TRESPASSES UNTO THEM,and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation"(2Cor.5:109).

You are going around and teaching that the Lord is NOW judging the world,but in fact that judgment will not come to pass until the LAST DAY!

Perhaps you can give us your evidence that the LAST DAY is already here.O,but I forgot.You probably do not have time,or you are unable to find your files.Of course you have a million reasons for not answering.But despite your words that you do not have the time,you are always here on this thread.

Nothing ever changes with you.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

Dear Jerry:

In case you missed it, I am no longer participating on this thread in light of recent events and statements and allegations.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

smilix,

Of course you again prove that you either do not believe what the LOrd says or you do not understand what He says.Let me repeat His words:

"...the word that I have spoken,the same shall judge him the last day"(Jn.12:48).

The judgment will not be until THE LAST DAY!!

And you admit that we are not yet in THE LAST DAY!!

But despite all this,you say:

"I believe this holds as well with the PRESENT JUDGMENT OF THE NATIONS!!!!

I am beginning to think that it is IMPOSSIBLE to have a SANE conversation with any preterist.When they will not believe the testimony of the Scriptures,I go to the testimony of the early church fathers.When they will not believe that testimony,they revert back to Scriptures.When I point out that their interpretation of the Scriptures is wrong,they are able to DELUDE their mind that the "judgment" is here already,but it has not arrived yet!!!!!!

You people twist the Scriptures to a point where they are no longer recognizable.If that doesn´t work,you say that some event has already happened,but it has not happened yet!

This only makes sense to those who are able to throw their common sense to the wind!

And that seems to be a trait that all of the preterists share.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[smilax]

Jerry, I'm only using our Lord's very words.

John xii, 31: "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out."

John xii, 47-48: "And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day."

Clinging to just one verse isn't enough.

 

[cirisme]

How many times does someone have to show his contempt and rudeness before being banned?

ditto here.

 

[automatthew]

For the record (if only for those who are still reading this thread), I am not a preterist operating under false pretenses. I grew up in churches *I think* would hold to the dispensationalist or futurist interpretation, but I'm not sure, because we didn't much discuss eschatology. I am new to both dispensationalism and preterism, in other words.

The charge of wolf-packing is uncharitable and, frankly, whining. People naturally flock to arguments in which they have a stake, no collusion required, and small groups of dissenters are especially disposed to take on fights anywhere they find them. Let's assume though, for Lion's sake, that preterists do intentionally crash parties with the express purpose of overwhelming the saints by numbers.

So what?

How does this address their arguments? This makes you *look* evasive, makes you *look* like blusterers. I don't believe that you are these things, but that's because I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.

The swarming insects charge would be more offensive if it was not just silly: The preterists are stealing your bandwidth, polluting your message, taking advantage of the audience to make public their views. Again, let's assume for the sake of argument that some preterists do intentionally squat on your homestead. How can you, the moderator, tell the scheming squatters from the people who have come to take part legitimately in the discussion? Is it by evaluating their arguments? How can you tell an honest argument from an attempt to co-opt the discussion? Is it by evaluating the arguments?

I don't see even an attempt at this being made. Blanket accusations, blanket ad hominem accusations, will serve instead.

Address the arguments, not your suppositions about the intent of the arguers (You can do it; it's just like hating the sin, not the sinner).

Matthew

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by automatthew
For the record.........

Matthew

Again... Lion's post had nothing specifically to do with THIS thread. (other than JP's continued rude behavior).

He only posted it here because it was connected via JP's behavior and other factors.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

smilax,

You overlook the words that are under discussion.And these words SPECIFY that it is the Lord Jesus HIMSELF who will judge all the nations:

"And before HIM shall be gathered all the nations;And HE shall separate them one from another..."(Mt.25:32).

These verses state in no uncertain terms that it will be the Lord Jesus Christ HIMSELF Who shall judge the nations.

And the words of the Lord Jesus Christ while He walked the earth are equally clear:

"If any man hear My words,and believe not,I JUDGE HIM NOT;for I came,not to judge the world but to save the Lord"(Jn.12:47).

It will not be until the end of the age when the Lord shall judge the unbelievers!

You give no verses that state that the Lord was judging the unbelievers while He walked the earth,and you just IGNORE the verses where He says that He was not judging while He walked the earth.Please allow me to repeat His words for you,and perhaps this time you will BELIEVE HIM:

"And if any man hear My words,and believe not,I JUDGE HIM NOT..."(Jn.12:47).

"For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world,but that the world through Him might be saved"(Jn.3:17).

Are you still willing to argue that the Lord Jesus was JUDGING the world and condemning the world when He walked on the earth?

Do you not understand that we are nw living in the "acceptable year of the Lord"(Lk.4:19)?

The Lord spoke those words in the synagogue at Nazareth,and after saying those words "he closed the book" of Isiah,leaving out the words that follow:

"To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,and THE DAY OF VENGENCE OF OUR GOD"(Isa.61:2).

We are NOW living in the "acceptable year of the Lord."This is the age of GRACE,and His servants are to declare to the world that "God was in Christ,reconciling the world unto Himself,NOT IMPUTING THEIR TREASPASSES UNTO THEM,and hath committed to us the word of reconciliation"(2Cor.5:19).

It will not be until the age of grace has passed when the DAY OF VENGENCE OF OUR GOD will begin.

But we see that in order for some to cling to their false eschatology they would pervert the Scriptures and declare that NOW is the time when God is imputing the sins of the world to them.They teach that the Lord Jesus was judging all the nations but at the same time He Himself said that He was not judging any man.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[GrayPilgrim]

Forgive me for an intrussion into your discussion, and if this was already brought up please let me know where.


Dee Dee said way back when (I seem to recall it would be on page 2 or 3 of this thread with a date around the 17th) that the destruction in 70 AD was the final execution of the Covenant curses of Deuteronomy 28. I am arguing here for a misunderstanding of covenental structures not the overall veracity if your argument, i.e. I would respectfully ask you to look more into this detail.

We are 100% agreed that this 2nd Temple destructionon on Tisha b'Av (the 9th of Av) was the culmination of God's Riv against the Jews for their failure to keep His covenant.

Where we disagree is the idea that you can call it the final repudiation of them. First of all the New Covenant only makes sense within hte context of the Mosaic Covenant and a repudiation of the former would covenentally lead to the repudiation to its subset, i.e. the New. [It is covenental structures that lead me to a futurist interptretaion BTW, not anything in the NT, moreover this view prevents me from falling within Covenantal Theology which seems to be a necesssary trajectory of praeterism].

I will write more later on covennatl structures that have led me to this conclusion, if you would please direct me to or tell what makes you see this as the final covenantl rejection (as opposed to the first Tisha b'Av.

 

[Solly]

Originally posted by Knight
Again... Lion's post had nothing specifically to do with THIS thread. (other than JP's continued rude behavior).

He only posted it here because it was connected via JP's behavior and other factors.

So, a roaring Lion goes about, seeking whom he may devour, and in the process takes a few bites out of some well intentioned members and subsribers, and we don't even get a "Sorry you lost an arm or a leg there guys, just friendly fire, you know how it is in war."

Is your conscience resting easy, Sir Tinpants?

Adios amigo.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Solly

Is your conscience resting easy, Sir Tinpants?

Adios amigo.

Yes... as a matter of fact it is!

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Solly

and in the process takes a few bites out of some well intentioned members and subsribers

Your definition of "well intentioned" must be very different from mine.

Oh, and how do you know Lion's warning wasn't just "apocalyptic language"?

 

[RightIdea]

Although I'm not truly new here (I used to post here under another name -- I think it was Bysshe, but I can't remember for certain), I have been gone a while. Nevertheless, I have read through this thread and a few others involving the Preterist view, and I must say...

I am an Acts-9 Open Dispensationalist (and an aquaintance of Enyart himself), and I agree with Dee Dee that the Preterists are being handled somewhat unfairly. I recognize that some of them may indeed have acted quite inappropriately. However, even the detractors (including Lion) seem to agree that not all preterists are guilty of dishonesty and other inappropriate behavior. And yet you support an across-the-board banning of all preterists? As much as I strongly disagree with the preterist view, I think that is much too heavy-handed, to say the least.

Even if a group of preterists intend to swoop down on the board and take it over, I for one am not afraid of them. I worship a God of truth, and I believe truth ultimately prevails. So why should I be afraid? I'm armed, armored and ready for the battle of debate.

Dee Dee, I don't know if you'll see this post, but here is one Acts-9 Open Dispy who hopes you will stick around and continue to bless us with your presence.

 

[GrayPilgrim]

AMEN!

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by RightIdea
Although I'm not truly new here (I used to post here under another name -- I think it was Bysshe, but I can't remember for certain), I have been gone a while. Nevertheless, I have read through this thread and a few others involving the Preterist view, and I must say...

I am an Acts-9 Open Dispensationalist (and an aquaintance of Enyart himself), and I agree with Dee Dee that the Preterists are being handled somewhat unfairly.

Much of what had been warned about has been publicly corroborated. So, I hardly think the warning could be construed as "unfair".

I recognize that some of them may indeed have acted quite inappropriately. However, even the detractors (including Lion) seem to agree that not all preterists are guilty of dishonesty and other inappropriate behavior. And yet you support an across-the-board banning of all preterists?

No.. we don't support an "across-the-board banning of all preterists". TOL is not into banning anyone. Thats what warnings are for.

As much as I strongly disagree with the preterist view, I think that is much too heavy-handed, to say the least.

If any group of people NO MATTER what their beliefs are engage in similar tactics similar warnings would be given. In fact we have done similar things in the past.

Even if a group of preterists intend to swoop down on the board and take it over, I for one am not afraid of them. I worship a God of truth, and I believe truth ultimately prevails. So why should I be afraid? I'm armed, armored and ready for the battle of debate.

Same here! Which is why we openly accepted the preterists several months ago and we still do welcome them as long as they do not engage in deceitful tactics.

 

[Arminian]

As one of the founding member/owners of Theologyonline I here and now put all preterists on notice.

The next attempt at sneaky, deceitful, or wolf pack antics, any of you perform, will result in my strong recommendation to have all preterists permanently banned from this site.

Histrionics. :down:

 

[Bill Kampsen]

I have been away for awhile and have been unable to follow what has been going on with TOL and the preterists. What a shock to see the fallout over such a silly thing. While I am a preterist, I have refrained from getting involved with the threads debating such issues because I see them as minor. Still, I would appear to be implicated with this "crime" by default.
The heavy-handedness that has been employed in dealing with this matter has left me bewildered and jaded with the TOL forum. They fact that they think it is necessary to use force to silence an opinion reveals a lot about the nature of a group.
To re-work a quote by T. Jefferson: "Only error needs the support of the TOL authorities, truth can stand by itself."

I'll look for a new website...