Preterism, a step by step explanation

[Covenanter]

Grappler:
I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.

I'll take that as a question.

The evidence & agreement that Rev. wsa written around ad 95 is based on a line by Irenaeus known only in Latin translation from the Greek, made long after. The line is ambiguous, as to whether John or his vision was seen. The internal evidence for a date before ad 70 is compelling.

The opening verses are for the blessing & encouragement of the readers because the time is at hand.

3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

It's not a vague "down the ages" prophecy applicable to countless situations down the centuries. Nor is it a set of prophecies that are specific for a yet future "end time" after the church is "raptured."

It is not even about a yet future "end times tribulation" but for the suffering church to which John is writing. We need to recognise two aspects to tribulation - inflicted by unbelievers on Christians, & inflicted on unbelievers by God.

9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

2 Thes. 1:4 So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure:
5 Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:
6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;

In Mat. 21 & Luke 20, Jesus speaks of "coming" to destroy the husbandmen who rejected the Son of God. In Mat. 24, he speaks words that are quoted in Rev. 1 referring to THAT coming - ad 70.

Mat. 21:40 When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen?
41 They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
.......
45 And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.

Luke 20:16 He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.

Mat. 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth [Gk - ge, tribes of the land (of Israel)] mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Rev. 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth [tribes of the land] shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

John 19:37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.

We should not insist that that "coming" is yet future for us. Throughout the OT God speaks of visiting his people, for blessing & judgement. e.g.

Gen. 50:24 And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die: and God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land unto the land which he sware to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.

Ex. 32:34 Therefore now go, lead the people unto [the place] of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine Angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them.

He came in clouds of glory for the dedication of tabernacle & temple. He prophesied coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory for judgement of that temple, & the nation that finally rejected him.

That sets the scene for the further prophecies of Revelation.

[Stucky]

 

I'm curious, how does Preterism explain this verse:


Revelation 16:12

New International Version (NIV)


12 The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up to prepare the way for the kings from the East.

[Covenanter]

Sorry Stucky - I'm working through Rev. & am only half way through chapter 1.

Watch this thread, hopefully the thought train will become apparent.

[Stucky]

Sorry Stucky - I'm working through Rev. & am only half way through chapter 1.

Watch this thread, hopefully the thought train will become apparent.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Okay, thanks.  Then amend my question to:  What makes Preterists so special that they get their own Forum and the rest of us have to settle for threads?

Ironically, it was at the request of the non-preterists that the preterists were given their own forum.  They didn't like the preterists commenting in their End Times threads with comments and objections that they considered to be off-topic.

Me, I kinda wear the title preterist.  The people who are preterists tell me I'm not one, but the people who aren't preterists tell me I am.

Maybe I am just confused. 

Jarrod

[Stucky]

Okay, thanks.  Then amend my question to:  What makes Preterists so special that they get their own Forum and the rest of us have to settle for threads?

Ironically, it was at the request of the non-preterists that the preterists were given their own forum.  They didn't like the preterists commenting in their End Times threads with comments and objections that they considered to be off-topic.

Me, I kinda wear the title preterist.  The people who are preterists tell me I'm not one, but the people who aren't preterists tell me I am.

Maybe I am just confused. 

Jarrod

[Lehigh]

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

[Grappler]

Grappler:
I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.

I'll take that as a question.

The evidence & agreement that Rev. wsa written around ad 95 is based on a line by Irenaeus known only in Latin translation from the Greek, made long after. The line is ambiguous, as to whether John or his vision was seen. The internal evidence for a date before ad 70 is compelling.

The opening verses are for the blessing & encouragement of the readers because the time is at hand.

3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

It's not a vague "down the ages" prophecy applicable to countless situations down the centuries. Nor is it a set of prophecies that are specific for a yet future "end time" after the church is "raptured."

It is not even about a yet future "end times tribulation" but for the suffering church to which John is writing. We need to recognise two aspects to tribulation - inflicted by unbelievers on Christians, & inflicted on unbelievers by God.

9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

2 Thes. 1:4 So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure:
5 Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:
6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;

In Mat. 21 & Luke 20, Jesus speaks of "coming" to destroy the husbandmen who rejected the Son of God. In Mat. 24, he speaks words that are quoted in Rev. 1 referring to THAT coming - ad 70.

Mat. 21:40 When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen?
41 They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
.......
45 And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.

Luke 20:16 He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.

Mat. 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth [Gk - ge, tribes of the land (of Israel)] mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Rev. 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth [tribes of the land] shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

John 19:37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.

We should not insist that that "coming" is yet future for us. Throughout the OT God speaks of visiting his people, for blessing & judgement. e.g.

Gen. 50:24 And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die: and God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land unto the land which he sware to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.

Ex. 32:34 Therefore now go, lead the people unto [the place] of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine Angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them.

He came in clouds of glory for the dedication of tabernacle & temple. He prophesied coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory for judgement of that temple, & the nation that finally rejected him.

That sets the scene for the further prophecies of Revelation.

Naaa....i think i will stick with Revelation as being a future prophecy, considering some of those prophecies are on a global scale.  But hey if you want to believe that it was written before 70 AD and only pertained to Jerusalem be my guest.

[Grappler]

Okay, thanks.  Then amend my question to:  What makes Preterists so special that they get their own Forum and the rest of us have to settle for threads?

Ironically, it was at the request of the non-preterists that the preterists were given their own forum.  They didn't like the preterists commenting in their End Times threads with comments and objections that they considered to be off-topic.

Me, I kinda wear the title preterist.  The people who are preterists tell me I'm not one, but the people who aren't preterists tell me I am.

Maybe I am just confused. 

Jarrod

Yeah you probably are a little confused Jarrod but that is okay because scripture can be confusing...afterall it is based on faith.  That is why i get a little laugh at some of these people on here that preach and go on about how correct their views are when actually it is all faith based to begin with.  As far as labels like preterists or futurists or whatever that is all nonsense to me...the only label i want to be called is a child of God.

[Grappler]

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

[Covenanter]

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Grappler, look through my posts - including direct responses to you.

The OP asked for a step-by-step explanation.

When you insist on a "global" interpretation of Revelation, you need to consider what events of global significance were occurring around ad 100 - I can think of one:

Mat. 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

[Covenanter]

Continuing in Rev. 1 - can there be ANY doubt about the fact that Jesus is presently reigning over an eternal kingdom?

His glorious appearance contradicts the NIV translation in Isaiah 6. Surely Isaiah saw the seraphim covering the LORD from human view.

Isa. 6:1 In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord, high and exalted, seated on a throne; and the train of his robe filled the temple. 2 Above him were seraphim, each with six wings: with two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying. (NIV)

Rev. 1:14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

Bearing in mind Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. Mat. 18:10

Are the angels of the seven churches heavenly angelic beings, or they they human messagers? John's Messengers are in Greek "angels."  (Luke 7:24) As Rev. 2 & 3 continue, obviously these "angels" are human messengers, taking the letters to their churches. 

I do not think the discussion of Preterism is affected by Rev. 2-4, except to assert that the 7 letters are real letters to real churches, & that the Holy Spirit extends the letters to all of us - 7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

[Grappler]

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Grappler, look through my posts - including direct responses to you.

The OP asked for a step-by-step explanation.

When you insist on a "global" interpretation of Revelation, you need to consider what events of global significance were occurring around ad 100 - I can think of one:

Mat. 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Oh so you don't take Revelation very serious?  How convenient....

[Covenanter]

I think we will all agree that Rev. 5 is before the "tribulation" whatever & whenever we understand by that.

The triumphant Christ is given the sealed scroll, so that by opening it he knows the timing of his Father's plans.

John sees the saints in glory: And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

John sees a vision of global redemption accomplished by the triumphant Lion-Lamb. Note that "kindred" is φυλή phylē, normally translated "tribes" & referring to the tribes of Israel. The redeemed children of Israel are counted in with the redeemed of the Gentiles.

As we move into Rev. 6 we see the triumphant Lamb opening the seals. Is the white horseman Christ or antichrist? Is the Lamb revealing the events that were at hand or future events of no particular significance to believers till the end of time & "the" antichrist? Don't forget there were many antichrists in John's time.

Notice the white horseman had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer. The same Greek word (nikeo [we wear Nike sportwear]) used for "prevailed" in 5:5. He prophesied against those who had rejected him in his Olivet prophecy. Now the seals are opened for that judgment to take place.

The red, black & pale horsemen: And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.

That dreadful judgment corresponds exactly to the judgment of Jerusalem spoken by Ezekiel:
14:21 For thus saith the Lord God; How much more when I send my four sore judgments upon Jerusalem, the sword, and the famine, and the noisome beast, and the pestilence, to cut off from it man and beast?

Happily Ezekiel also prophesies deliverance for the believing remnant:
22 Yet, behold, therein shall be left a remnant that shall be brought forth, both sons and daughters: behold, they shall come forth unto you, and ye shall see their way and their doings: and ye shall be comforted concerning the evil that I have brought upon Jerusalem, even concerning all that I have brought upon it.
23 And they shall comfort you, when ye see their ways and their doings: and ye shall know that I have not done without cause all that I have done in it, saith the Lord God.

The fifth seal reveals the martyrs who have suffered at the hands of the rebellious Jews. 9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: 10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? "Earth" is Greek "ge" often referring to the land of Israel.

It is important to note that these saints in glory, awaiting vindication, are described in similar terms to the souls of the "millennium" souls:
20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God,.....

With the sixth seal, Jesus shows the terror of the rebels as the terrifying judgment begins - and notice that Jesus' warning to the women of Jerusalem is being realised:
28 But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children.
29 For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck.
30 Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us.

The signs accompanying that destruction are described in similar terms to the signs that accompanied the destruction of Babylon (Isaiah 13) & Egypt. (Ezek. 32)

The believers of the tribes - a perfect number 144,000 are protected & delivered before the 4 winds of judgment fall on the land. These are numbered with the great multitude of believers from all nations. They have been suffering tribulation - afflicted particularly by the Christ-rejecting Jews - & now have promised rest & comfort.

When the seventh seal is opened, prayers rise to God, while the angels prepare to sound their trumpets.

[Lehigh]

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Of course I'm serious. Now, "kings of the east " were the auxiliary armies of Titus that came to the siege. I already explained Rev.16:12 in another thread in end-times.
As far as "nations" well, you are going to have to be more specific- bc God sometimes refers to Israel as many "nations" and sometimes "nations" describes gentile nations. So, be specific to which verse and passage in question. "all the people of the Earth" is most likely interpreted- the "land." So, once again, you have to be seriously specific to know which verse and context you mention.
Revelation is a book of "7s" It is the same catastrophe for the Jews, just with different feature and characters along the way.

[Grappler]

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Of course I'm serious. Now, "kings of the east " were the auxiliary armies of Titus that came to the siege. I already explained Rev.16:12 in another thread in end-times.
As far as "nations" well, you are going to have to be more specific- bc God sometimes refers to Israel as many "nations" and sometimes "nations" describes gentile nations. So, be specific to which verse and passage in question. "all the people of the Earth" is most likely interpreted- the "land." So, once again, you have to be seriously specific to know which verse and context you mention.
Revelation is a book of "7s" It is the same catastrophe for the Jews, just with different feature and characters along the way.

An auxillary army of Titus.lol  That is cute.  An auxillary army of 200 million.lol  No i don't think there were main armies near that size then much less "auxillary" armies.  I will quote exact verses for you later gotta go.

[Stucky]

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Of course I'm serious. Now, "kings of the east " were the auxiliary armies of Titus that came to the siege. I already explained Rev.16:12 in another thread in end-times.
As far as "nations" well, you are going to have to be more specific- bc God sometimes refers to Israel as many "nations" and sometimes "nations" describes gentile nations. So, be specific to which verse and passage in question. "all the people of the Earth" is most likely interpreted- the "land." So, once again, you have to be seriously specific to know which verse and context you mention.
Revelation is a book of "7s" It is the same catastrophe for the Jews, just with different feature and characters along the way.

An auxillary army of Titus.lol  That is cute.  An auxillary army of 200 million.lol  No i don't think there were main armies near that size then much less "auxillary" armies.  I will quote exact verses for you later gotta go.

[Lehigh]

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Of course I'm serious. Now, "kings of the east " were the auxiliary armies of Titus that came to the siege. I already explained Rev.16:12 in another thread in end-times.
As far as "nations" well, you are going to have to be more specific- bc God sometimes refers to Israel as many "nations" and sometimes "nations" describes gentile nations. So, be specific to which verse and passage in question. "all the people of the Earth" is most likely interpreted- the "land." So, once again, you have to be seriously specific to know which verse and context you mention.
Revelation is a book of "7s" It is the same catastrophe for the Jews, just with different feature and characters along the way.

An auxillary army of Titus.lol  That is cute.  An auxillary army of 200 million.lol  No i don't think there were main armies near that size then much less "auxillary" armies.  I will quote exact verses for you later gotta go.

[/quot

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Of course I'm serious. Now, "kings of the east " were the auxiliary armies of Titus that came to the siege. I already explained Rev.16:12 in another thread in end-times.
As far as "nations" well, you are going to have to be more specific- bc God sometimes refers to Israel as many "nations" and sometimes "nations" describes gentile nations. So, be specific to which verse and passage in question. "all the people of the Earth" is most likely interpreted- the "land." So, once again, you have to be seriously specific to know which verse and context you mention.
Revelation is a book of "7s" It is the same catastrophe for the Jews, just with different feature and characters along the way.

An auxillary army of Titus.lol  That is cute.  An auxillary army of 200 million.lol  No i don't think there were main armies near that size then much less "auxillary" armies.  I will quote exact verses for you later gotta go.

Roman history cute? 
Revelation is apocalyptic language. You don't seem to be able to separate fact from fiction if you can't recognize God's prophetic hyperboles.
The 200m us a hyperbole there for emphasis to mean 'you are going to get creamed"

[Stucky]

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Of course I'm serious. Now, "kings of the east " were the auxiliary armies of Titus that came to the siege. I already explained Rev.16:12 in another thread in end-times.
As far as "nations" well, you are going to have to be more specific- bc God sometimes refers to Israel as many "nations" and sometimes "nations" describes gentile nations. So, be specific to which verse and passage in question. "all the people of the Earth" is most likely interpreted- the "land." So, once again, you have to be seriously specific to know which verse and context you mention.
Revelation is a book of "7s" It is the same catastrophe for the Jews, just with different feature and characters along the way.

An auxillary army of Titus.lol  That is cute.  An auxillary army of 200 million.lol  No i don't think there were main armies near that size then much less "auxillary" armies.  I will quote exact verses for you later gotta go.

[/quot

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Of course I'm serious. Now, "kings of the east " were the auxiliary armies of Titus that came to the siege. I already explained Rev.16:12 in another thread in end-times.
As far as "nations" well, you are going to have to be more specific- bc God sometimes refers to Israel as many "nations" and sometimes "nations" describes gentile nations. So, be specific to which verse and passage in question. "all the people of the Earth" is most likely interpreted- the "land." So, once again, you have to be seriously specific to know which verse and context you mention.
Revelation is a book of "7s" It is the same catastrophe for the Jews, just with different feature and characters along the way.

An auxillary army of Titus.lol  That is cute.  An auxillary army of 200 million.lol  No i don't think there were main armies near that size then much less "auxillary" armies.  I will quote exact verses for you later gotta go.

Roman history cute? 
Revelation is apocalyptic language. You don't seem to be able to separate fact from fiction if you can't recognize God's prophetic hyperboles.
The 200m us a hyperbole there for emphasis to mean 'you are going to get creamed"

  Wow, how brave of you to call God a liar.  God exagerrated in the Bible.  And here I thought God only spoke the truth.  Silly me.  So, I guess God "exaggerated when He said He flooded the entire World?  Maybe it was just a regional flood?  Did He "exaggerate" when He said that Jesus was in the grave three days?  How could you God? 

[Lehigh]

       

[Grappler]

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Of course I'm serious. Now, "kings of the east " were the auxiliary armies of Titus that came to the siege. I already explained Rev.16:12 in another thread in end-times.
As far as "nations" well, you are going to have to be more specific- bc God sometimes refers to Israel as many "nations" and sometimes "nations" describes gentile nations. So, be specific to which verse and passage in question. "all the people of the Earth" is most likely interpreted- the "land." So, once again, you have to be seriously specific to know which verse and context you mention.
Revelation is a book of "7s" It is the same catastrophe for the Jews, just with different feature and characters along the way.

An auxillary army of Titus.lol  That is cute.  An auxillary army of 200 million.lol  No i don't think there were main armies near that size then much less "auxillary" armies.  I will quote exact verses for you later gotta go.

[/quot

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Of course I'm serious. Now, "kings of the east " were the auxiliary armies of Titus that came to the siege. I already explained Rev.16:12 in another thread in end-times.
As far as "nations" well, you are going to have to be more specific- bc God sometimes refers to Israel as many "nations" and sometimes "nations" describes gentile nations. So, be specific to which verse and passage in question. "all the people of the Earth" is most likely interpreted- the "land." So, once again, you have to be seriously specific to know which verse and context you mention.
Revelation is a book of "7s" It is the same catastrophe for the Jews, just with different feature and characters along the way.

An auxillary army of Titus.lol  That is cute.  An auxillary army of 200 million.lol  No i don't think there were main armies near that size then much less "auxillary" armies.  I will quote exact verses for you later gotta go.

Roman history cute? 
Revelation is apocalyptic language. You don't seem to be able to separate fact from fiction if you can't recognize God's prophetic hyperboles.
The 200m us a hyperbole there for emphasis to mean 'you are going to get creamed"

Ahhh...ok so we are back to picking and choosing what parts of the bible are fact and which are fiction.lol  You don't seem to understand that believing any of the bible is faith based.  What you call a biblical fact someone else may come along and say no...you can't prove it so it is not fact at all.  Anyways i don't think it is compatible nor wise for someone who claims to be a bible believing Christian to pick and choose what they want.  To say that the "kings of the east" was a Roman auxillary army is laughable to say the least...thanks for the laugh.

[Grappler]

Hmm.  You know Coventanter i may just be a "partial preterists" as you call it.  I, believe that Jesus is coming back literally as scripture teaches to set up his kingdom on Earth.  I reject Dispensationalism, Pre-trib. escape, and the modern Zionsists state of Israel.  Does that make me a "partial preterists"?

We have a basic agreement on the final coming of our Lord.

I presume from what you have written elsewhere that you believe in a continuous-historical interpretation of NT prophecy, particularly Revelation. Most accept Irenaeus' account as indicating that John had his visions in the 90s. They see the seal/trumpet/vial judgements as occurring throughout history & intensifying towards the end; also they see the Papacy as the great Roman antichrist.

It's a position I believed & taught for many years - even preached through Revelation with that understanding, but the questions I had needed answering. Further study & internet searches led to my present understanding.

The Olivet prophecy - up to "this generation" leads to ad 70;
Revelation was written before ad 70;
ethnic Israel lost all significance with their rejection, first of their Messiah, then the Apostolic Gospel - Israel is now the Church, comprising both Jew & Gentile believers, one redeemed people of God in Christ;
events in the Middle East ar without prophetic significance;
there will not be a prophesied rebuilt temple - even if one is built, it will be of no prophetic significance;
there are no "end-times" warning signs to indicate Jesus imminent return.

That, of course, gives further challenges:
What of 2 Thes. 2?
How can most of the Revelation prophecies be explained as having been fulfilled in ad 70?
How did Jesus come in ad 70?

This thread can run & run.....

I see no reason to not believe that Revelation was written by John in the 90s.  To make the claim that all the prophecies of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, i think is rather foolish when one reads some of the details of the prophecies.  So i guess i am not a "partial preterists" after all.      

There's a very logical reason (besides many others)  why Revelation wasn't written in AD95.  If so, why didn't John, a Hebrew, record the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 as a past fact instead of a soon to take place prophecy?

Please don't discuss logic.  Full preterist should avoid that word all together. lol  So because John didn't say anything about the fall of Jerusalem in AD70 is why you think Revelation was not written in the 90s?  What about the verses in Revelation that deals with prophecy on a global scale?  To say that all the prophecies of Revelation were only dealing with Jerusalem in AD70 is #1 idtiotic  or #2 not taking the book of Revelation very serious.

What "global scale?" reference is that?

Are you serious?  I mean really are you serious?   Okay....when i say global scale i am talking about the prophecies in the book of Revelation that used terms like "nations" or "all people of the Earth" or "kings of the East"...this is just off the top of my head i don't have the time at this moment to dig up verses but if you like i can do that for you later Lehigh.  These terms imply a much larger scale than just Jerusalem or Palestine...but hey if you just ignore those references then you don't have to worry about them.lol

Of course I'm serious. Now, "kings of the east " were the auxiliary armies of Titus that came to the siege. I already explained Rev.16:12 in another thread in end-times.
As far as "nations" well, you are going to have to be more specific- bc God sometimes refers to Israel as many "nations" and sometimes "nations" describes gentile nations. So, be specific to which verse and passage in question. "all the people of the Earth" is most likely interpreted- the "land." So, once again, you have to be seriously specific to know which verse and context you mention.
Revelation is a book of "7s" It is the same catastrophe for the Jews, just with different feature and characters along the way.

Here is just a few specific verses for you Lehigh.  Revelation 9:18 By these three plagues a third of mankind was killed, by the fire and smoke and sulfur coming out of their mouths.  I take that literally.  Revelation 11:9-10  Those from the peoples and tribes and tongues and nations will look at their dead bodies for three and a half days, and will not permit their dead bodies to be laid in a tomb.
10 And those who dwell on the Earth will rejoice over them and celebrate; and they will send gifts to one another, because these Two Prophets tormented those who dwell on the Earth.  Once again i take this literally.  John refers to peoples and tribes and tongues and nations and those who dwell on the Earth...now i know this may be hard for you to accept but anyone of just a little common sense can see this clearly is a reference to something much broader and larger than Palestine in 70 AD. Is this enough verses or would you like some more? 

[Stucky]

       

I've noticed that when someone has nothing intelligent or relevant to say in a discussion they just use a little emoticon.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Ahhh...ok so we are back to picking and choosing what parts of the bible are fact and which are fiction.lol

To be fair, everyone picks and chooses which part of the Bible they think are figurative or symbolic.

For example, Ezekiel 28 says that the king of Tyrus was the cherub that protected the garden of Eden against Adam and Eve returning there.  Literal or Figurative?  Can a man be a cherub?

Jarrod

[Stucky]

Ahhh...ok so we are back to picking and choosing what parts of the bible are fact and which are fiction.lol

To be fair, everyone picks and chooses which part of the Bible they think are figurative or symbolic.

For example, Ezekiel 28 says that the king of Tyrus was the cherub that protected the garden of Eden against Adam and Eve returning there.  Literal or Figurative?  Can a man be a cherub?

Jarrod

Jarrod,

Are you familiar with the principal of hermaneutics?  The term hermeneutics covers both the first order art and the second order theory of understanding and interpretation of linguistic and non-linguistic expressions.

Ezekiel 28
If this passage were referring exclusively to the ruler of Tyre, then you would certainly have to say that it is a case of imagery and even overstatement.

•Could Ezekiel actually have had the "ruler" in mind when he described him as being "perfect and blameless" in all his ways? The doctrine of original sin is muddled when one considers that the "king of Tyre" is said to have been "blameless from the day he was created." In contrast to that statement, King David wrote "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." (Psalm 51:5) Satan was sinless when he was created, but that could not be said of any earthly ruler, not even King David.
•It is said that the King of Tyre was 'created' instead of 'born.' If the word 'born' had been used it would certainly have ruled out Satan, but that is not the case.
•The ruler of Tyre could not have been in the Garden of Eden. Satan was.
•It seems strange that the king is described as being adorned with 'every precious stone.' Did he really have such wealth? If this were referring to a king, it would seem to be exaggeration.
•The king was called a "guardian cherub." This would make it the only instance in the Old Testament where that word was used in reference to a human. That seems unlikely when you study how the word 'cherub' is used in other contexts.
•At one time, the "king of Tyre" would have been in close fellowship with God, for it is said that he walked on the 'holy mount of God.' Obviously this could not have been the case; it would have to be imagery. The 'holy mount of God' is a direct reference to God's throne. On the other hand 'cherubs' are associated with closeness to God, as demonstrated in the construction of the 'Ark of the Covenant.' "The cherubim (pl. of cherub) were the "inner circle" of angels who had the closest access to God and guarded his holiness. "

There can be no reasonable doubt that the ruler of Tyre is not the only person being referred to here. On the other hand, it is quite reasonable to believe that the passage is referring to the ruling power behind the ruler of Tyre's actions.

It should be noted that addressing Satan through a human being is consistent with another passage in scripture. In Matthew 16:23 we see that "Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men." Jesus was talking at Peter, but directing his comments to Satan. Reading the passage carefully it is hard to determine just which part of the sentence was for Peter and which part was for Satan. (One feels the same uncertainty at times in Isaiah and Ezekiel.) Whichever the case, Peter got an earful, and Satan-the ruling power behind Peter's foolish words-was put in his place. In the same way, the ruler of Tyre would have been warned, and Satan-the ruling power behind his reign-would have been exposed.

[Grappler]

Ahhh...ok so we are back to picking and choosing what parts of the bible are fact and which are fiction.lol

To be fair, everyone picks and chooses which part of the Bible they think are figurative or symbolic.

For example, Ezekiel 28 says that the king of Tyrus was the cherub that protected the garden of Eden against Adam and Eve returning there.  Literal or Figurative?  Can a man be a cherub?

Jarrod

Jarrod...i don't know about you...but i try to take the scriptures literal.  When reading Ezekiel 28 i see the description of two different beings called the king of Tyre. The first one being a human.  The second one being someone much more than a human.  Do you believe there was an Eden?  And if you do, do you believe that a human was referred to as the guarding cherub or someone much greater than a human? Since i take the scriptures literal and in context we see that Ezekiel is describing two different persons because we know that a mere human was not guarding Eden.

[Covenanter]

It would be helpful, Stucky, if you refrained from off topic postings that swell the numbers but contribute nothing to the thread.

We come now to Rev. 8-11, the 7 trumpets. Jesus, the white horseman,  has opened the seals to the saints in glory. Now, with the trumpets come warnings with graphic details. Remember to read "land" for "earth" & "men" for "mankind." Interpretive translation can lead us astray. Remember also the opening words of Jesus in Rev. 1. In his Olivet prophecy, Jesus warned, 22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. When we read the OT, & the judgment prophecies, very graphic language is used. You rebels, be afraid, be very afraid. You cannot escape the wrath of God by running from him - TURN & LIVE.

The Jews called a curse on themselves when they demanded the crucifixion of Jesus: his blood be on us, & on our children. The Gospel cancels that curse: For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

There has been some discussion about a Preterist interpretation of the 200 million army. Read Joel - the army is a plague of locusts. 200 million is not an exaggeration.

Wiki:
It is estimated that the largest swarms have covered hundreds of square miles and consisted of many billions of locusts.

We must note that the 7 trumpets include the destruction of Jerusalem in Rev. 11. We must therefore understand the trumpets as relating to ad 70 & NOT some future "end times" judgment. We all have difficulties in explaining the details, but when we study the OT we see similar details referring to long past judgments.

Notice 10:5 And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven,
6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:
7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

That is the response to the martyr's question: 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? Jesus prophesied: Mat. 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

Their only salvation is to acknowledge Jesus as Lord: 39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. Paul wrote: 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

The dreadful warnings are intending to turn many to Christ for salvation. Lifting these prophesies to some invented future generation after the "rapture" of the church & the power of the Holy Spirit is an utterly false interpretation of Scripture intended for the blessing & encouragement of its readers: 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.
 

[Stucky]

It would be helpful, Stucky, if you refrained from off topic postings that swell the numbers but contribute nothing to the thread.

We come now to Rev. 8-11, the 7 trumpets. Jesus, the white horseman,  has opened the seals to the saints in glory. Now, with the trumpets come warnings with graphic details. Remember to read "land" for "earth" & "men" for "mankind." Interpretive translation can lead us astray. Remember also the opening words of Jesus in Rev. 1. In his Olivet prophecy, Jesus warned, 22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. When we read the OT, & the judgment prophecies, very graphic language is used. You rebels, be afraid, be very afraid. You cannot escape the wrath of God by running from him - TURN & LIVE.

The Jews called a curse on themselves when they demanded the crucifixion of Jesus: his blood be on us, & on our children. The Gospel cancels that curse: For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

There has been some discussion about a Preterist interpretation of the 200 million army. Read Joel - the army is a plague of locusts. 200 million is not an exaggeration.

Wiki:
It is estimated that the largest swarms have covered hundreds of square miles and consisted of many billions of locusts.

We must note that the 7 trumpets include the destruction of Jerusalem in Rev. 11. We must therefore understand the trumpets as relating to ad 70 & NOT some future "end times" judgment. We all have difficulties in explaining the details, but when we study the OT we see similar details referring to long past judgments.

Notice 10:5 And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven,
6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:
7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

That is the response to the martyr's question: 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? Jesus prophesied: Mat. 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

Their only salvation is to acknowledge Jesus as Lord: 39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. Paul wrote: 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

The dreadful warnings are intending to turn many to Christ for salvation. Lifting these prophesies to some invented future generation after the "rapture" of the church & the power of the Holy Spirit is an utterly false interpretation of Scripture intended for the blessing & encouragement of its readers: 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

Would you care to explain your first sarcastic remark and also explain how this doesnt apply to you and the other users?  How is what you posted after your sarcastic remark "on topic" and mine, which was in response to Jarrod's, off topic?  Do you have the nerve to tell Jarrod the same thing or just me?  Such hypocricy.

[Stormcrow]

Can someone (who is a preterist) please give a step by step explanation and articulation of what this "end times viewpoint" involves and why you believe this.  It would be of immense help to those who simply do not understand.

I have no comment on the rest of your post, but in this case, at least, you have removed the verse from its context, and thus obscured its meaning. If you had continued on to verse 22, you would see that.

I thought the OP was clear, too: he was asking for "explanation and articulation" not "argument and debate."

I think Lehigh has laid out the explanation pretty well. 

As to why I believe it, it's really rather simple: either Jesus did as He said He would or He did not (refer to the passages Lehigh posted for those things He said He would do.)

If He did not do what He said He would, what does that make Him?  If He did and people don't believe it, what does that make them? 

One cannot call Jesus "Lord" and "liar" at the same time.  It's just that simple.

[Stucky]

Can someone (who is a preterist) please give a step by step explanation and articulation of what this "end times viewpoint" involves and why you believe this.  It would be of immense help to those who simply do not understand.

I have no comment on the rest of your post, but in this case, at least, you have removed the verse from its context, and thus obscured its meaning. If you had continued on to verse 22, you would see that.

I thought the OP was clear, too: he was asking for "explanation and articulation" not "argument and debate."

I think Lehigh has laid out the explanation pretty well. 

As to why I believe it, it's really rather simple: either Jesus did as He said He would or He did not (refer to the passages Lehigh posted for those things He said He would do.)

If He did not do what He said He would, what does that make Him?  If He did and people don't believe it, what does that make them? 

One cannot call Jesus "Lord" and "liar" at the same time.  It's just that simple.

Good one, Stormcrow, not expecting "argument and debate" on this forum.   

[Stormcrow]

An auxillary army of 200 million

http://aoreport.com/ao/prophecy-studies-mainmenu-47/archived-studies-mainmenu-64/272-the-myth-of-the-200-million-man-army-of-the-kings-of-the-east

Your "200 million man army" is a myth and is - again - the result of an utterly absurd translation. Read the link.

[Stormcrow]

Good one, Stormcrow, not expecting "argument and debate" on this forum.

I'm just wondering what part of "explanation and articulation" isn't perfectly clear to you.

[Stucky]

An auxillary army of 200 million

http://aoreport.com/ao/prophecy-studies-mainmenu-47/archived-studies-mainmenu-64/272-the-myth-of-the-200-million-man-army-of-the-kings-of-the-east

Your "200 million man army" is a myth and is - again - the result of an utterly absurd translation. Read the link.

I did.  His opinion and your opinion.  Not fact.  We will see what we will see.

[Stucky]

Good one, Stormcrow, not expecting "argument and debate" on this forum.

I'm just wondering what part of "explanation and articulation" isn't perfectly clear to you.

Why are you arguing and debating instead of explaining and articulating right now, Stormcrow?  Hypocrisy

[Covenanter]

It would be helpful, Stucky, if you refrained from off topic postings that swell the numbers but contribute nothing to the thread.

Would you care to explain your first sarcastic remark and also explain how this doesnt apply to you and the other users?  How is what you posted after your sarcastic remark "on topic" and mine, which was in response to Jarrod's, off topic?  Do you have the nerve to tell Jarrod the same thing or just me?  Such hypocricy.

Stucky:
Jarrod,
Are you familiar with the principal of hermaneutics?  The term hermeneutics covers both the first order art and the second order theory of understanding and interpretation of linguistic and non-linguistic expressions.

You own reply to Jarrod began with a condescending & sacastic remark.

Jarrod made a relevant comment, with an example, it did not need a reply. It was rhetorical.

While your reply was an answer to his point, it was off-topic.