ECT A Preterist Time Chart

Interplanner

Well-known member
Steko wrote:
Yes, they would remember as the Spirit would bring to memory whatsoever He had said unto them, but what He said and what they believed was in perfect harmony with prophecy for the nation of Israel.




Not at all. Acts 26. They kept at the worship services, but Paul said it was already here in the preaching of the resurrection.

As a historical note, the zealots believed the same as the leaders of Judaism about the sacrificial system finally bringing Messiah's reign (Judaism and D'ism are the same on this), but the zealots believed the current temple to be defiled. Sometimes they solved this by worship out at other places. As if that would make any difference relative to Christian belief.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Steko wrote:
In Mt 24, the term 'elect' refers to GOD's chosen/bachir/eklectos nation and the final believing elect being gathered back to the land, again...all in harmony with what the OT prophets said.





But again there are distinctions to make that you are missing. Who is Christ's elect now? It's not Israel. Their place/house is desolate. ('House' meant more than a building; it was an identity). Paul said the new elect is both Jew and Gentile in Christ in Rom 9:24 with 4 OT passages supporting that.

this is where in its massive confusion D'ism often finds the solution to be two--of-everything. One for Israel only, one for Christians. 'Never the twain meet.' The most recent was this past weekend where David's throne is separate from Christ/God.

The vision is not in harmony with such 2P2P. It is in harmony with the way the NT uses the OT. To which the D'ists usually say they are both true, lol (the OT by itself and the NT using it). this misses the doctrine which Paul explained that there are things embedded in the OT, missed by post-exilic Judaism, that God has now opened back up clearly in Christ and the Gospel. That is why we have the beautiful Eph 3 with the sharing of Israel's inheritance 'through the Gospel.'
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Steko wrote:
Nope, lots to happen on this earth after the Lord returns. Acts 3:21
Then much later in the NHNE there will be a sequence of events, thus the passage of time.




This is where things get quite flimsy for D'ism. It just isn't there. I have listed the NT non-symbolic passages about the return in judgement, and none of them have anything happening in Israel as such (separate, millenial). Even the brief reference in Rev 20 is slight and without detail.

How did Christ forget all this when saying that he covered ALL that the prophets spoke on the Emmaus road? which is the same limitation Paul put on himself in Acts 26:22 'saying nothing beyond.'

The NHNE is never detailed as far as a sequence of events. It is a state of bliss in the next life in Christ, where evil cannot happen again, unlike the long reign of Christ right now.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Steko wrote:
That was the finality of the fig tree/the religion of Israel.
It wasn't the finality of the vine/the nation of Israel.

When the Lord said that, He also said, 'Jerusalem(the center of Israel), you shall not see me henceforth until you[Jerusalem] say unto me, "Baruch haba b'shem Adonai", thus fulfilling Ps 118.
Then put Acts 3 with it where Peter says, "You men of Israel, repent and He shall send Jesus".
Israel will be pressed until a remnant repents and calls on the name of YHVH/Yeshua.






More two-of-everything. 'House' in Hebrew does not have such a distinction. You cannot fracture it into such separation.

You have missed the fact that a few chapters later after Mt 23, he was sung to from Ps 118; they were the ones who believed his sacrifice was the power driving the new kingdom. The event was so small it did not trigger a dispatch of the Antonia guard who patrolled the temple. They probably saw the colt and chuckled.

It is very important to avoid 100% categories. Many of Israel believed. Enough to launch the mission. It all succeeded. But not enough of Israel believed to abandone their stupid fight with Rome, Lk 14:31.

There is no outstanding 'Israel will be pressed' to be dealt with. Of course, it would be great if lots of them became evangelists, even today.
 

steko

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Steko wrote:
That was the finality of the fig tree/the religion of Israel.
It wasn't the finality of the vine/the nation of Israel.

When the Lord said that, He also said, 'Jerusalem(the center of Israel), you shall not see me henceforth until you[Jerusalem] say unto me, "Baruch haba b'shem Adonai", thus fulfilling Ps 118.
Then put Acts 3 with it where Peter says, "You men of Israel, repent and He shall send Jesus".
Israel will be pressed until a remnant repents and calls on the name of YHVH/Yeshua.


You have missed the fact that a few chapters later after Mt 23, he was sung to from Ps 118; they were the ones who believed his sacrifice was the power driving the new kingdom. The event was so small it did not trigger a dispatch of the Antonia guard who patrolled the temple. They probably saw the colt and chuckled.

You have missed the fact that it was actually a few chapters earlier(Mt 21) that He rode into Jerusalem on the donkey when the crowd quoted Ps 118.
The fact that the Lord Jesus said what He did in Mt 23, means that for complete fulfillment Jerusalem Israelites must do it again for Christ's return.
 

Danoh

New member
You have missed the fact that it was actually a few chapters earlier(Mt 21) that He rode into Jerusalem on the donkey when the crowd quoted Ps 118.
The fact that the Lord Jesus said what He did in Mt 23, means that for complete fulfillment Jerusalem Israelites must do it again for Christ's return.

Yep :thumb:
 

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
the end of 31 actually

The end of 31 does not talk about cataclysm. It simply talks about a gathering of souls.
("souls" is my presumption)
In addition, it does not give a beginning or an end to the process.

The whole verse is a statement that something will happen with a goal in mind and eventual consequences.
"He will send..."

If we read it correctly, it is not necessarily sequentially connected to the other verses in the way verse 29 begins; "Immediately after..
Or even verse 30 which begins; "And then shall..."

It is entirely without a time/sequence anchor.
 

steko

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
The NHNE is not the same corporeality as we have now. There is no marrying. God himself is the light and the Lamb is the temple.

Still doesn't mean there is no sequence of events, a before and an after, time.

I think that concept is just something that someone imagined and it caught on, but no one can explain why.
 

Danoh

New member
The end of 31 does not talk about cataclysm. It simply talks about a gathering of souls.
("souls" is my presumption)
In addition, it does not give a beginning or an end to the process.

The whole verse is a statement that something will happen with a goal in mind and eventual consequences.
"He will send..."

If we read it correctly, it is not necessarily sequentially connected to the other verses in the way verse 29 begins; "Immediately after..
Or even verse 30 which begins; "And then shall..."

It is entirely without a time/sequence anchor.

It was to be, and was...temporarily...interrupted.

Compare the latter half of Matthew 10 with about the middle of Luke 21, and the latter half of Romans 9 - which is the longsuffering that 2 Peter 3 is referring to.
 

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
You have missed the fact that it was actually a few chapters earlier(Mt 21) that He rode into Jerusalem on the donkey when the crowd quoted Ps 118.
The fact that the Lord Jesus said what He did in Mt 23, means that for complete fulfillment Jerusalem Israelites must do it again for Christ's return.

Steko,

I know we will disagree on this so I'm not going to press it too far, but, could you explain a little further so I can understand your position?

My take on this is that it cannot be repeated and repetition is not what Jesus had in mind in Matt. 23:39KJV.

For one thing, if you press the physical fulfillment aspect of this verse, His statement is not accurate "...not see Him again...". They would see Jesus again - physically. I suggest that He did not have a physical "seeing again" in mind but, rather, a spiritual awakening for them of the same type that He explained to Nicodemus - yielding to Jesus and being born again of the Spirit; being welcomed as King in the same fashion that the crowd did.

Secondly, the order is reversed.
In the first case, Jesus deliberately went to Jerusalem without invitation and was welcomed by individuals who loved Him and recognized Him as King. But He is saying that He will not even arrive until they first acknowledge Him as Lord. The order cannot be repeated because they must first acknowledge Him as Lord.
 

Danoh

New member
Still doesn't mean there is no sequence of events, a before and an after, time.

I think that concept is just something that someone imagined and it caught on, but no one can explain why.

Very simple - his is a result of the sorting out of a thing by men, from within their own reasoning.

A reasoning that too soon heads for it's own various conclusions, in contrast to studying a thing out a bit longer as to what other pieces of it's seeming puzzle the Scripture might contain further information on.

The Spirit teaches through "that which is written."

2 Corinthians 4:13 We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak;

Plain and simple.

Nehemiah 8:8 So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

8:12 And all the people went their way to eat, and to drink, and to send portions, and to make great mirth, because they had understood the words that were declared unto them.

Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Which is what this means...

Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

Notice...

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, 24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:

The Spirit teaches through His Word...

Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. 17:12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

This is why Mid-Acts does not make sense to them.

Their questions during their attempt to sort a thing out, and therefore their results; differ from the types of questions the MADist gradually learns to come to ask, simply through more, and more time in Scripture, attempting to see just a bit more, followed by just a bit more, and a bit more, what is what, a bit clearer.

And the more diligent the MADist seeks to be at that, the finer his distinctions come to be, over those less diligent, 2 Tim. 2:15.

One ends up with a very different approach than those not MAD.

And through that; one's answers are often very different from those the reasoning of men into a thing, often results in.

Thus, I do not view such in unbelief.

Rather, confused.

Like the individual who, believing the Scripture; actually cuts out his offending eye.

Such are simply...confused in the understanding they have come to believe...is sound.

The Lord Himself had felt this way...

Luke 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.

Thus, Romans 5:8.

And thank God for it...
 

Danoh

New member
Steko,

I know we will disagree on this so I'm not going to press it too far, but, could you explain a little further so I can understand your position?

My take on this is that it cannot be repeated and repetition is not what Jesus had in mind in Matt. 23:39KJV.

For one thing, if you press the physical fulfillment aspect of this verse, His statement is not accurate "...not see Him again...". They would see Jesus again - physically. I suggest that He did not have a physical "seeing again" in mind but, rather, a spiritual awakening for them of the same type that He explained to Nicodemus - yielding to Jesus and being born again of the Spirit; being welcomed as King in the same fashion that the crowd did.

Secondly, the order is reversed.
In the first case, Jesus deliberately went to Jerusalem without invitation and was welcomed by individuals who loved Him and recognized Him as King. But He is saying that He will not even arrive until they first acknowledge Him as Lord. The order cannot be repeated because they must first acknowledge Him as Lord.

Consider that you are actually engaged in the very practice I just now posted about - you are reasoning about all that, absent of more information on it, from the Scripture.

That is why steko's assertion does not make sense to you - it is from within where you yourself reason on one thing or another.

And Scripture demands one approach it from within it's own reasoning.

As with any other area in life.
 

George Affleck

TOL Subscriber
It was to be, and was...temporarily...interrupted.

Stating something as if it were a fact does not make it a fact.

Compare the latter half of Matthew 10 with about the middle of Luke 21, and the latter half of Romans 9 - which is the longsuffering that 2 Peter 3 is referring to.

You will need to be much more specific.
I am familiar with all of those passages and just read them again to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Like I said to a waitress today at a restaurant I had never visited; "Pretend I have never been here before; what is good?".
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Yeah, it would take hours upon hours to unscramble that kinked up wad of barbed wire!




The stupidest comment in all of ECT is STP saying Made up. It is vapid, mindless, inarticulate, lazy, dull. Help yourself.

To Steko:
The vision of the OT prophets as interped by the NT is quite different. We can't read the scriptures veiled; they are unveiled in Christ. What they actually were meant to say was taking place through the apostles; it was not a Jewish kingdom being waited for. I believe you will find that is much of the barbed wire you have tangled in. There are 2500 uses of the OT by the NT, but few have made it a study, and D'ism like Judaism (as its own claims say) reads the OT without it.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
You have missed the fact that it was actually a few chapters earlier(Mt 21) that He rode into Jerusalem on the donkey when the crowd quoted Ps 118.
The fact that the Lord Jesus said what He did in Mt 23, means that for complete fulfillment Jerusalem Israelites must do it again for Christ's return.




You are quite right, I reversed 21 and 23, but the doctrine is not substantially different: there were people who ALREADY HAD sung that psalm to him, because it was already true. The leaders could be part of the faith community if they believed it about him. Their house was already desolate, but they could become part of the living temple.

There is nothing in the NT about Israel doing this at the 2nd coming as a prediction, nothing that in year X000 it will happen; that is not the sense of the language. it is obligating them, and telling them how they could have their eyes open but it is not a prediction, no more than Rom 11 is predicting Israel in its land. It is provoking, prodding, urging.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Still doesn't mean there is no sequence of events, a before and an after, time.

I think that concept is just something that someone imagined and it caught on, but no one can explain why.





For the same reason, the idea that there are events is imagined and has caught on. If you were talking about this world, as many, many have, you might imagine events happening to Israel and wars etc, but we are talking about another world where God is the light and the Lamb is the temple. What is your source of material?
 
Top