Author Topic: Just a (polite) rant...  (Read 1746 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

raggthyme

  • Guest
Just a (polite) rant...
« on: March 04, 2012, 03:04:02 PM »
Hi all, it's The Polite Preterist here. (hey, I kinda like that...)  ::smile::

I wanted to touch on something that's been bugging me for awhile now (besides the accusation that Preterism itself is antisemitic, which is totally false and another topic entirely)... the continual insinuation (by certain individuals of a particular eschatological group) that the Apostle Peter was actually talking about Preterists in 2 Peter 3...

"This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you;... in which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance... knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of His coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."

Several people have been using this passage of scripture to demonize Christians who have come to believe our Lord's words over creeds and traditions, specifically those of us who accept that Jesus spoke of the events which transpired roughly 40 years after He prophesied them, saying "these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled." Luke 21

First, Peter, writing prior to 70ad referred specifically to the scoffers of his time who were mocking the prophecy of that coming judgment. We, living after the fact, affirm that this judgment did in fact take place, and within the generation Jesus said it would. Apples and oranges, folks.

Second, Preterists believe that judgment came as Christ said it would but we are slanderously reported as saying, "where is the promise of His coming? There will be no judgment." Wait, what? How can one mock a coming judgment and at the same time affirm that the judgment did come? It's an illogical accusation. We're talking about the timing (and nature) of events here, not the denial of them. Peter was speaking of those who didn't believe it would happen, because to them "all things continue(d) as they were from the beginning of the creation."

This accusation against us appears to arise from the belief that, in chapter 3, Peter was referring to a fiery dissolution of the physical heavens and earth. And since that obviously hasn't happened yet, those who believe God's promise in Genesis 8 are considered by some to be the scoffers Peter was writing about. I would like to propose again that this interpretation of 2 Peter 3 goes completely against God's promise...

"And the LORD smelled a sweet savor, and the LORD said in His heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done."


Some have said that God only meant that He would never again smite all things living by flood but He never promised not to do the same by fire! Do we serve a God of escape clauses? I believe an honest look at Genesis 8:21 (in context) reveals the truth. God knows that man's heart is evil from his youth, but even so He promised that He will never again destroy all living things as He did in the flood. So then, we are left with searching out an interpretation of 2 Peter that compliments, rather than conflicts with this promise...



The "New Heavens and Earth"
(2 Peter 3:13)

The apostle makes a distribution of the world into heaven and earth, and saith they were destroyed with water, and perished. We know that neither the fabric nor substance of the one or other was destroyed, but only men that liveth on the earth; and the apostle tells us (ver. 7) of the heaven and earth that were then, and were destroyed by water, distinct from the heavens and the earth that were now, and were to be consumed by fire; and yet as to the visible fabric of heaven and earth they were the same both before the flood and in the apostle's time, and continue so to this day; when yet it is certain that the heavens and earth, whereof he spake, were to be destroyed and consumed by fire in that generation. We must, then, for the clearing of our foundation a little, consider what the apostle intends by the heavens and the earth in these two places.

1. It is certain that what the apostle intends by the world, with its heaven, and earth (vers. 5, 6), which was destroyed ; the same, or some-what of that kind, he intends by the heavens and the earth that were to be consumed and destroyed by fire (ver. 7) ; otherwise there would be no coherence in the apostle's discourse, nor any kind of argument, but a mere fallacy of words.

2. It is certain that by the flood, the world, or the fabric of heaven and earth, was not destroyed, but only the inhabitants of the world; and therefore the destruction intimated to succeed by fire is not of the substance of the heavens and the earth,... but of person or men living in the world.

3. Then we must consider in what sense men living in the world are said to be the world, and the heavens and earth of it. I shall only insist on one instance to this purpose among many that may be produced: Isa. 51:15, 16. The time when the work here mentioned, of planting the heavens and laying the foundation of the earth, was performed by God was when He divided the sea (ver. 15) and gave the law (ver. 16), and said to Zion, Thou art my people; that is, when He took the children of Israel out of Egypt, and formed them in the wilderness into a church and state; then He planted the heavens and laid the foundation of the earth: that is, brought forth order, and government, and beauty from the confusion wherein before they were. This is the planting of the heavens and laying the foundation of the earth in the world. And since it is that when mention is made of the destruction of a state and government, it is in that language which seems to set forth the end of the world. So Isa. xxxiv. 4, which is yet but the destruction of the state of Edom. The like also is affirmed of the Roman Empire (Rev. vi. 14), which the Jews constantly affirm to be intended by Edom in the prophets. And in our Saviour Christ's prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem (Matt. xxiv.) He sets it out by expressions of the same importance. It is evident, then, that in the prophetical idiom and manner of speech, by heavens and earth, the civil and religious state and combination of men in the world, and the men of them, were often understood. So were the heavens and earth that world which then was destroyed by the flood.

4. On this foundation I affirm that the heavens and earth here intended in this prophecy of Peter, the coming of the Lord, the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men, mentioned in the destruction of that heaven and earth, do all of them relate, not to the last and final judgment of the world, but to that utter desolation and destruction that was to be made of the Judaical church and state; for which I shall offer these two reasons, of many that might be insisted on from the text:-

(1.) Because whatever is here mentioned was to have its peculiar influence on the men of that generation. He speaks of that wherein both the profane scoffers and those scoffed at were concerned, and that as Jews, some of them believing, others opposing, the faith. Now there was no particular concernment of that generation, nor in that sin, nor in that scoffing, as to the day of judment in general ; but there was a peculiar relief for the one and a peculiar dread for the other at hand, in the destruction of the Jewish nation ; and, besides, an ample testimony both to the one and the other of the power and dominion of the Lord Jesus Christ, which was the thing in question between them.

(2.) Peter tells them, that after the destruction and judgment that he speaks of (vers. 7-13), " We, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth,' etc. They had this expectation. But what is that promise? Where may we find it? Why, we have it in the very words and letter, Isa. lxv. 17. Now, when shall this be that God shall create these new heavens and new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness? Saith Peter, " It shall be after the coming of the Lord, after that judgment and destruction of ungodly men, who obey not the gospel, that I foretell." But now it is evident from this place of Isaiah, with chap. lxvi. 21, 22, that this is a prophecy of Gospel times only; and that the planting of these new heavens is nothing but the creation of Gospel ordinances to endure for ever. The same thing is so expressed Heb. xii. 26-28.

This being the design of the place, I shall not insist longer on the context, but briefly open the words proposed, and fix upon the truth continued in them.

First, There is the foundation of the apostle's inference and exhortation, seeing that all these things, however precious they seem, or what value soever any put upon them, shall be dissolved, that is, destroyed; and that in that dreadful and fearful manner before mentioned, in a day of judgment, wrath, and vengeance, by fire and sword; let others mock at the threats of Christ's coming: He will come- He will not tarry; and then the heavens and earth that God Himself planted, -the sun, moon, and stars of the Judaical polity and church, -the whole old world of worship and worshippers, that stand out in their obstinancy against the Lord Christ, shall be sensibly dissolved and destroyed: this we know shall be the end of these things, and that shortly.

There is no outward constitution nor frame of things in government or nations, but it is subject to a dissolution, and may receive it, and that in a way of judgment. If any might plead exemption, that, on many accounts, of which the apostle was discoursing in prophetical terms (for it was not yet time to speak it openly to all) might interpose for its share. -J.Owen



I'm not sure of Mr. Owen's eschatological views, but I agree with his interpretation of 2 Peter 3. This idea that Preterists are the ones walking after their own lusts and scoffing at the Lord's prophecy of judgment (that was soon to come upon Jerusalem) is ridiculous at best, and I felt it needed addressing.

God bless.






« Last Edit: March 05, 2012, 10:02:48 AM by raggthyme »

Offline JohnDB70X7

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 507
  • Manna: 16
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #1 on: March 04, 2012, 09:01:52 PM »
Am I permitted to post a response here?

raggthyme

  • Guest
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #2 on: March 04, 2012, 09:08:40 PM »
Of course, John.  ::smile:: I would only ask that you stick to the details of the OP if possible. 


Offline JohnDB70X7

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 507
  • Manna: 16
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2012, 09:22:36 PM »
Okay.

You mentioned in the first sentence about Preterism being antisemitic (even though making mention to avoid the subject, but you still mentioned it).

Even though that would in my mine be open season on the subject I will be courteous to you and ask if you mind my making a brief point about that and moving on?

raggthyme

  • Guest
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2012, 09:39:55 PM »
That sounds reasonable.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2012, 09:39:55 PM »



Offline JohnDB70X7

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 507
  • Manna: 16
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #5 on: March 04, 2012, 09:50:12 PM »
Thank you.

I was not trying to name call anyone. In fact I should have said that any belief system that holds to replacement theology is antisemitic in that belief. Preterism holds to replacement theology does it not? Rhetorical question. To keep this brief I will only cite the verses and those interested can look them up. Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the Gospel in the OT. Immediately after are verses 35-37 regarding God not being through (finished with Israel) as well as Romans 11:28 (just after the grafted in verses of the Olive tree verses 16-26). I'm done.

Thanks again.

Offline JohnDB70X7

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 507
  • Manna: 16
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #6 on: March 04, 2012, 09:56:41 PM »
Now to the rest of the OP...

I invite you to revisit the thread about the apostasy before the rapture... in it I stated that I do not say for certain that I believe Preterism is that apostasy (I even suspect another thing entirely is being referred to) but I do explain how Preterism fits the bill in at least several points (not all but several).

This is not about name calling or one upsmanship  or my theology is bigger than your theology. Though clumsily at times (obviously) I am only trying to get at the truth.

If you do not, visit the thread, that is, I understand. No pressure.

Good day (evening).

raggthyme

  • Guest
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #7 on: March 04, 2012, 10:55:41 PM »
Thank you.

I was not trying to name call anyone. In fact I should have said that any belief system that holds to replacement theology is antisemitic in that belief. Preterism holds to replacement theology does it not? Rhetorical question. To keep this brief I will only cite the verses and those interested can look them up. Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the Gospel in the OT. Immediately after are verses 35-37 regarding God not being through (finished with Israel) as well as Romans 11:28 (just after the grafted in verses of the Olive tree verses 16-26). I'm done.

Thanks again.

I guess it would truly depend on how you define antisemitic. Would you say it encompasses anyone who does not adhere to Christian Zionism?

Personally, I do not believe Preterism teaches replacement theology, at least not from what I have understood. How can the church be said to replace Israel when it is in itself the very fulfillment of the promise made to the remnant? Isaiah 10:22, Romans 9:27

I would like to comment on Jer 31:31. Yes, vs 31-34 refer to the salvation that came to Israel through the gospel, but only to the remnant. In vs 36 the LORD speaks of the seed of Israel, who shall not cease from being a nation before Him. If this was referring to the nation that we know as Israel today, what becomes of His promise while there was no nation for nearly 1900 years? I personally understand the seed of Israel to be referring to this:

But ye [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Which in time past [were] not a people, but [are] now the people of God:

Who are the chosen people? I believe this answers it... the gentiles grafted into the remnant of Israel making that one new man.

Now to the rest of the OP...

I invite you to revisit the thread about the apostasy before the rapture... in it I stated that I do not say for certain that I believe Preterism is that apostasy (I even suspect another thing entirely is being referred to) but I do explain how Preterism fits the bill in at least several points (not all but several).

This is not about name calling or one upsmanship  or my theology is bigger than your theology. Though clumsily at times (obviously) I am only trying to get at the truth.

If you do not, visit the thread, that is, I understand. No pressure.

Good day (evening).

Thank you, I hadn't seen your recent posts on that thread. If you don't mind, I'd like to post parts of it so I can tie it into  this topic.


you said:

Preterists teach that the highlighted [2 Peter 3:10 and 12] refers only to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 CE. That the elements are temple elements used in daily operations and sacrifices. And the heavens in their interpolation is the covenant with God and further into the chapter the new heaven and new earth is just the New Covenant.

I imagine quite a few Preterists (even full Preterists) are unaware of this teaching...


I have only been studying Preterism for about 4 months now, and I was fully aware of this. I would say though that I believe the elements are also referring to the same thing Paul talks about in Galatians 4 and Colossians 2. I'm also not in total agreement with the portion I highlighted above. I think there's more to that. In fact, this is the bulk of my OP.. the reasoning behind the belief that Peter is not referring to the physical heavens and earth and an explanation of the alternative.

Did you happen to read through the entire post?

« Last Edit: March 07, 2012, 01:02:20 PM by raggthyme »

thethinker

  • Guest
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #8 on: March 05, 2012, 08:14:35 AM »
raggthyme said:
Quote
Second, Preterists believe that judgment came as Christ said it would but we are slanderously reported as saying, "where is the promise of His coming? There will be no judgment." Wait, what? How can one mock a coming judgment and at the same time affirm that the judgment did come? It's an illogical accusation. We're talking about the timing (and nature) of events here, not the denial of them. Peter was speaking of those who didn't believe it would happen, because to them "all things continue(d) as they were from the beginning of the creation."


Ragggthyme,

Well done Sis! Accusations are all the Futurists have. Exegetically they have nothing. The Futurists make Jesus and the Apostles into false prophets. They also make God into a liar because He breaks His promises. Paul assured the Thessalonians that God would give THEM relief from THEIR persecutions "when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven." But the Futurists deny this which means that God broke His promise to THEM. Jesus did not return from heaven to give THEM the relief that was promised.

One word about their "anti-semitic" accusation. The promise of the resurrection and the rapture was originally made to Israel (Hosea 12:13 w/ 1 Corinthians 15:50). Yet the Futurists make Israel the last to be resurrected and totally take away the rapture from them. Then they have the audacity to call Preterists "anti-semitic."

Your logic is irrefutable. Again well done and manna!



thinker

EdwardGoodie

  • Guest
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #9 on: March 05, 2012, 01:10:54 PM »
I would like to add some thoughts to the OP's quotation of 2 Peter 3:3-4

2 Peter 3:3-4 - Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,  
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
 

First, "fathers" from verse 4 is JEWISH in nature.  I want those from the antipreterist movement to consider the implications of that understanding.

Second, these scoffers would come in the future to Peter's epistle and near the end of the generation which Christ Himself defined the time.

Third, these scoffers DID COME!! Now, I realize that futurists have little concept of audience relevance as demonstrated by a child's understanding of finding a letter written by their great, great grandfather.  In this letter (which was written to the great, great grandfather's wife), it says that he would be coming to visit shortly.

The child came down from the attic loudly proclaiming, "My great, great grandfather is coming to visit us shortly.  Yeah, I can't wait to meet him for the first time!"  Can you imagine the shock of surprise on the faces of the child's parents?  The parents would have to tell their child that the great, great grandfather had died several years before the child had even been born.  They would also have to mention that the letter wasn't written specifically to them.  It had been written back in the great, great grandfather's time period and was written to a different audience.  The great, great grandfather would not be coming to visit at all, let alone in a short period of time.

I think the child would be able to understand such an explanation.  But it is obvious that futurists choose not to.

Let me demonstrate...

"Scoffer" or "mocker" is used only twice in the entire Bible.  It is Strong's G1703 - εμπαικται.

The only other time it is used is in Jude 1:18 (or Jude 18 if you prefer).

Consider the relevance of those "mockers" from the epistle written by Jude to his audience.  Note that it is common FUTURIST knowledge that Jude was written after 2 Peter.

Jude 1:18 - How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.  

Here is a question futurists will not like...Who are the "they" and who are the "you"?  If the "you" are 21st century Christians, then the "they" are 21st century Christians too because the "they" would have to be alive to to tell "you" anything...

However, Jude 1:17 is very clear in saying that the "they" were the apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ (dead people).

Jude 1:17 - But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;  

The "you" are the people who have been told these things by the apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ.  It wasn't us, folks.

Next is what Jude says in the content of his epistle...

This wording matches 2 Peter 3:3 right down to their characteristic of lust and is much too exact to be just an ordinary coincidence.  Jude said these mockers refer to those who “are [present tense] certain men crept in unawares
« Last Edit: March 05, 2012, 02:39:23 PM by EdwardGoodie »

Offline JohnDB70X7

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 507
  • Manna: 16
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #10 on: March 07, 2012, 07:53:52 AM »
Thank you.

I was not trying to name call anyone. In fact I should have said that any belief system that holds to replacement theology is antisemitic in that belief. Preterism holds to replacement theology does it not? Rhetorical question. To keep this brief I will only cite the verses and those interested can look them up. Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the Gospel in the OT. Immediately after are verses 35-37 regarding God not being through (finished with Israel) as well as Romans 11:28 (just after the grafted in verses of the Olive tree verses 16-26). I'm done.

Thanks again.

I guess it would truly depend on how you define antisemitic. Would you say it encompasses anyone who does not adhere to Christian Zionism?

Depends on how you define Christian Zionism.

Quote
Personally, I do not believe Preterism teaches replacement theology, at least not from what I have understood. How can the church be said to replace Israel when it is in itself the very fulfillment of the promise made to the remnant? Isaiah 10:22, Romans 9:27

Better brush up on what Preterists believe. All the promises of Israel bestowed upon the Church is how one of the Preterists here said it... replacement theology by any other name still smells as rotten...


Offline JohnDB70X7

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 507
  • Manna: 16
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #11 on: March 07, 2012, 08:08:42 AM »
I would like to comment on Jer 31:31. Yes, vs 31-34 refer to the salvation that came to Israel through the gospel, but only to the remnant. In vs 36 the LORD speaks of the seed of Israel, who shall not cease from being a nation before Him. If this was referring to the nation that we know as Israel today, what becomes of His promise while there was no nation for nearly 1900 years? I personally understand the seed of Israel to be referring to this:

But ye [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Which in time past [were] not a people, but [are] now the people of God:

Who are the chosen people? I believe this answers it... the gentiles grafted into the remnant of Israel making that one new man.

Abraham has two heirs known as his seed... the sand by the seashore and the stars of the heavens (Genesis 22:17 in keeping with Romans 9:6); one physical one spiritual.

Romans 4:16 (KJV)
16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

Romans 4:18 (KJV)
18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.

Galatians 3:16 (KJV)
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

So... the passage in Jeremiah 31:31-34 refers to all who believe in the Hebrew Messiah are spirit Israel spirit Jews... then it goes on to say that the physical Jews will never cease to be a nation before him etc.

You made a point about not being a nation for 1900 years... once again as with the terms "soon" near" "at hand" it all depends upon "soon near at hand" to whom (God). Israel will never cease to be a nation (to God) what Israel ceases to be by humans definition is moot. 

Quote
Now to the rest of the OP...

I invite you to revisit the thread about the apostasy before the rapture... in it I stated that I do not say for certain that I believe Preterism is that apostasy (I even suspect another thing entirely is being referred to) but I do explain how Preterism fits the bill in at least several points (not all but several).

This is not about name calling or one upsmanship  or my theology is bigger than your theology. Though clumsily at times (obviously) I am only trying to get at the truth.

If you do not, visit the thread, that is, I understand. No pressure.

Good day (evening).

Thank you, I hadn't seen your recent posts on that thread. If you don't mind, I'd like to post parts of it so I can tie it into  this topic.


By all means go ahead. Nothing I post online is to be hidden but open for all to see and quote as they see the need I only ask that it is in context of what I said.


Quote
you said:

Preterists teach that the highlighted [2 Peter 3:10 and 12] refers only to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 CE. That the elements are temple elements used in daily operations and sacrifices. And the heavens in their interpolation is the covenant with God and further into the chapter the new heaven and new earth is just the New Covenant.

I imagine quite a few Preterists (even full Preterists) are unaware of this teaching...


I have only been studying Preterism for about 4 months now, and I was fully aware of this. I would say though that I believe the elements are also referring to the same thing Paul talks about in Galatians 4 and Colossians 2. I'm also not in total agreement with the portion I highlighted above. I think there's more to that. In fact, this is the bulk of my OP.. the reasoning behind the belief that Peter is not referring to the physical heavens and earth and an explanation of the alternative.

Did you happen to read through the entire post?



I'm sorry, which post are you referring to?

Offline JohnDB70X7

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 507
  • Manna: 16
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #12 on: March 07, 2012, 08:13:38 AM »
How can taking what Jesus and the Apostles said to heart be making them out to be false prophets?

Time after time your Preterist dogma is refuted with scripture. Your accusations (like this one) are proven unfounded. And you rave on and on which is YOUR only recourse to being refuted.

raggthyme said:
Quote
Second, Preterists believe that judgment came as Christ said it would but we are slanderously reported as saying, "where is the promise of His coming? There will be no judgment." Wait, what? How can one mock a coming judgment and at the same time affirm that the judgment did come? It's an illogical accusation. We're talking about the timing (and nature) of events here, not the denial of them. Peter was speaking of those who didn't believe it would happen, because to them "all things continue(d) as they were from the beginning of the creation."


Ragggthyme,

Well done Sis! Accusations are all the Futurists have. Exegetically they have nothing. The Futurists make Jesus and the Apostles into false prophets. They also make God into a liar because He breaks His promises. Paul assured the Thessalonians that God would give THEM relief from THEIR persecutions "when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven." But the Futurists deny this which means that God broke His promise to THEM. Jesus did not return from heaven to give THEM the relief that was promised.

One word about their "anti-semitic" accusation. The promise of the resurrection and the rapture was originally made to Israel (Hosea 12:13 w/ 1 Corinthians 15:50). Yet the Futurists make Israel the last to be resurrected and totally take away the rapture from them. Then they have the audacity to call Preterists "anti-semitic."

Your logic is irrefutable. Again well done and manna!



thinker

Offline JohnDB70X7

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 507
  • Manna: 16
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #13 on: March 07, 2012, 08:42:53 AM »
I would like to add some thoughts to the OP's quotation of 2 Peter 3:3-4

2 Peter 3:3-4 - Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,  
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
 

First, "fathers" from verse 4 is JEWISH in nature.  I want those from the antipreterist movement to consider the implications of that understanding.

Well one way that can be interpreted is to say ever since 70 CE all things continue as they were from the beginning (no global tribulation period nor futurist eschatology)... which the Apostle is citing as incorrect doctrine / eschatology.

Quote
Second, these scoffers would come in the future to Peter's epistle and near the end of the generation which Christ Himself defined the time.

Which Christ defined as the generation that sees all the things he spoke of previously as being that generation which would not pass until they be accomplished... could be thousands of years yet to come because they all have not been accomplished... like the rebirth of the Levitical sacrificial system.

Quote
Third, these scoffers DID COME!!

(snip non sequitur)

You isolate part of the text to prove your point. You cannot properly interpret the passage by stopping at just the word scoffers. Scoffers came in Jesus' ministry and in Moses' and in Eden (Cain). Its the scoffers IN THE LAST DAYS who walk after their own lusts and put forth the eschatology that is typical to evolutionsist (no catastrophism just steady state for billions of years... and Preterists who state the return of Jesus was 1900 + years ago and the future will just like the past was...)


Quote
Scoffers will come who

Let me demonstrate...

"Scoffer" or "mocker" is used only twice in the entire Bible.  It is Strong's G1703 - εμπαικται.

The only other time it is used is in Jude 1:18 (or Jude 18 if you prefer).

Consider the relevance of those "mockers" from the epistle written by Jude to his audience.  Note that it is common FUTURIST knowledge that Jude was written after 2 Peter.

Jude 1:18 - How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.  

Here is a question futurists will not like...Who are the "they" and who are the "you"?  If the "you" are 21st century Christians, then the "they" are 21st century Christians too because the "they" would have to be alive to to tell "you" anything...

However, Jude 1:17 is very clear in saying that the "they" were the apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ (dead people).

LOL

Are you serious?

Jude says to remember what the Apostles said... meaning a reminder to the recipients of the letter of Jude that this will happen in the last days (which John defined as being already then and until the end) we would say dispensation but I know that's a bad word to Preterists...  

He also spoke of the return of the Lord Jesus quoting Enoch (who lived in Moses day)...

Is this the best you got?

Quote
Jude 1:17 - But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;  

The "you" are the people who have been told these things by the apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ.  It wasn't us, folks.

Next is what Jude says in the content of his epistle...

This wording matches 2 Peter 3:3 right down to their characteristic of lust and is much too exact to be just an ordinary coincidence.  Jude said these mockers refer to those who “are [present tense] certain men crept in unawares

raggthyme

  • Guest
Re: Just a (polite) rant...
« Reply #14 on: March 07, 2012, 09:45:24 AM »
Quote from: JohnDB70X7
You made a point about not being a nation for 1900 years... once again as with the terms "soon" near" "at hand" it all depends upon "soon near at hand" to whom (God). Israel will never cease to be a nation (to God) what Israel ceases to be by humans definition is moot.  


I believe God says things for our benefit. If the terms "soon" "near" "at hand" "never cease" etc. don't mean what they say then they mean nothing to us and are open to all kinds of interpretation.


Quote
I'm sorry, which post are you referring to?


The OP, especially what I posted about 2 Peter 3's "heavens and earth".

Thank you.

I was not trying to name call anyone. In fact I should have said that any belief system that holds to replacement theology is antisemitic in that belief. Preterism holds to replacement theology does it not? Rhetorical question. To keep this brief I will only cite the verses and those interested can look them up. Jeremiah 31:31-34 is the Gospel in the OT. Immediately after are verses 35-37 regarding God not being through (finished with Israel) as well as Romans 11:28 (just after the grafted in verses of the Olive tree verses 16-26). I'm done.

Thanks again.


I guess it would truly depend on how you define antisemitic. Would you say it encompasses anyone who does not adhere to Christian Zionism?


Depends on how you define Christian Zionism.


I define it like this:  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Zionism

Quote
Better brush up on what Preterists believe. All the promises of Israel bestowed upon the Church is how one of the Preterists here said it... replacement theology by any other name still smells as rotten...


Again, how can the church be said to replace Israel when it is in itself the very fulfillment of the promises made to the remnant? Isaiah 10:22, Romans 9:27

« Last Edit: March 07, 2012, 10:19:57 AM by raggthyme »