Christian Destinies

[mikesw]

99% of all Calvinists are preterists or partial and Amillennial. And he is a Calvinist

Sure. I still can read things backwards either when people are unclear or I just miss some cues in the responses. This problem also has happened when I read scholars' writings, especially if I am missing the background from the broader discussion.
Your observation sort of explains why he was asking questions about my beliefs rather than just sharing responses to the OP. (The confusion was regarding how my answers to those questions could change his responses regarding his beliefs. haha.)

 

[civic]

Sure. I still can read things backwards either when people are unclear or I just miss some cues in the responses. This problem also has happened when I read scholars' writings, especially if I am missing the background from the broader discussion.
Your observation sort of explains why he was asking questions about my beliefs rather than just sharing responses to the OP. (The confusion was regarding how my answers to those questions could change his responses regarding his beliefs. haha.)

Ditto

 

[Selah]

After the fulfilled prophecies are figured out, then the remaining prophecies can be considered for yet-future fulfillment. It truly seems that details of Daniel, such as the focus on the people of Israel, have been overlooked. It seems we have been given much tradition over the years without, for example, relating (i.e. exegeting) Matthew 24 to Daniel's context.

The prophetic books in the Bible are truly exciting. These books are where Jesus foretells us all things.
Without a doubt, the book of Joel was written about the judgment and events of "the last days" that precede the "Day of the Lord" and Jesus Christ's second coming. Since Joel's prophesy refers to the same "Day of the Lord" that John was taken to "in the spirit" in the Book of Revelation (Rev. 1:10), we can say that it is actually undated, but Peter sets the time for us on Pentecost Day when he tells us that the book of Joel was written concerning the events of "the last days.” Here it is in the book of Acts:

Acts 2:16-21 (KJV) 16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; 17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: 18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: 19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: 20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: 21 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

s e l a h

 

[JoshebB]

Exact word fallacy . Show me the word Trinity in the Bible

Appeal to false equivalence. You do not get to shift the onus because you cannot provide proof of your position. You were asked to provide any verse that explicitly states the last days will reach its culmination at Jesus' second coming some point during or after the 21st century. The correct response to that request is, "There is no such verse," and not an attempt to shift the onus with a false equivalence. Had the correct answer been provided we could then move forward with the discussion having established a point of consensus, so I am going to ask you again: Can you provide any verse that explicitly states the last days reach its culmination during or after the 21st century?

There is no verse in the Bible explicitly stating the word, "Trinity." That word is a doctrinal word, and I have never and will never claim that word is found in the Bible, but I will argue that term is an accurate term for what is described in the Bible, and I would do it here in this thread were it the subject of this thread.

Now you try it. Show me the verse stating the last days culminate during the 21st century or thereafter with Jesus' second coming.

 

[JoshebB]

99% of all Calvinists are preterists or partial and Amillennial. And he is a Calvinist

100% of all Christians are preterist. Most do not realize it because they have an incorrect understanding or definition of preterism. Theologically speaking, the word, "preterist," simply means there is a belief some or all of scripture's prophecies have been fulfilled. Therefore, ALL Christians are Christological preterists simply because we believe all the messianic prophecies have been fulfilled (or will be fulfilled) in Jesus and Jesus alone. There will not be another Messiah. Jesus is it. To be a Christian is to be a Christological preterist.

Eschatological preterism is also something every Christian practices to some degree, small or large. To the degree soteriology and eschatology overlap some of the end times were realized in the incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of Christ. Anyone who acknowledges the end times began in the New Testament era is a partially preterist. Preterism even exists among modern futurists, including those who subscribe to Dispensational Premillennialism (DP). John MacArthur (rip) and Gary Hamrick would be two prominent examples because both men tach the seven letters in Revelation were specifically about conditions and events that transpired in the first century. Both men vocally disagree with and resist preterism but both men are also partially preterist without acknowledging it. Then there is the matter of believing in the second coming and the prospect it might occur in this century (or later). That is a position to which most Amillennialists subscribe. Michael Horton, Kim Riddlebarger, Greg Beale, Vern Poythress, Cornelius Venema, Michael D. WIlliams, Stephen Wellum and scores of noted Amillennialists hold that viewpoint. Anyone can look that up with a simple Google search and verify that with them saying so in their own words.

You have, once again, misrepresented others and, thereby, proven your report unreliable. No one in this forum should ever think you correctly, accurately represent those with whom you disagree. Readers may agree with your soteriology, or your eschatology, or some other doctrine, but they should not rely on your report of others as factual, nor as a sound basis for protest.

 

[JoshebB]

I'm mainly looking for the clarification of JoshebB. (I was trying to use hazy memory at first to recall his name here. haha)

What is it you would like to know about my beliefs relevant to this op?

 

[JoshebB]

Daniel's content provides the skeleton for Matthew 24/Luke 21/Mark 13. Daniel primarily provides the concerns about the continuing sins of the people of Israel with additional details surrounding the four empires that ends with the Roman empire. There is somewhat an extension or vagueness about the saints who inherit the kingdom (especially Dan 7:13-27, 12:1-12).
Basically the end in view within Daniel concerns the end of the Israel nation. They were given a timeline of seventy weeks to recognize the time of their visitation. The end revolves around the passages about Israel, even if benefits are extended to broader peoples.

These are the passages that I have assembled based on wording. Note these are mostly limited to books I follow, so additional texts might be found. So I do not broadly cover books like Jeremiah and Ezekiel. The "general end" category is a catch all for use of "end" within less specifically worded phrases.

Latter Days
Dan 8:19, Deut 32:29, Dan 10:14

Latter end or Last days
Deut 32:29, Acts 2:17

Latter end of indignation
Dan 8:19, Dan 11:36

Latter end when transgressions are full
Dan 8:23, Dan 9:5, Deut 32:29

End to sacrifice and offering
Dan 9:27, Dan 8:11, Dan 8:13, Joel 1:9

End of Israel – Last Day – promises to Israel
Rom 11:26, Isa 10:22, Dan 11:40, Deut 32:29, Matt 24:14, Dan 12:7

General end
Matt 24:14, Dan 12:9, Deut 32:29, Dan 11:40, 1 Cor 15:24, 1 Peter 4:7, Dan 8:17, Matt 28:20, Isa 10:23

The more specific phrases like latter end and latter days are shaped by Deut 32:29 and Daniel. Joel (with Acts 2:17) provides more detail to show it was the latter days, as they led to the end. These are all in context of prophecy about Israel, with some possible address of the four empires. I can add the content of these verses if desired. But I am not particularly listing them to all be read at once

Great. Now tell me what the New Testament states about each of those points.

 

[Selah]

Appeal to false equivalence. You do not get to shift the onus because you cannot provide proof of your position. You were asked to provide any verse that explicitly states the last days will reach its culmination at Jesus' second coming some point during or after the 21st century. The correct response to that request is, "There is no such verse," and not an attempt to shift the onus with a false equivalence. Had the correct answer been provided we could then move forward with the discussion having established a point of consensus, so I am going to ask you again: Can you provide any verse that explicitly states the last days reach its culmination during or after the 21st century?

There is no verse in the Bible explicitly stating the word, "Trinity." That word is a doctrinal word, and I have never and will never claim that word is found in the Bible, but I will argue that term is an accurate term for what is described in the Bible, and I would do it here in this thread were it the subject of this thread.

Now you try it. Show me the verse stating the last days culminate during the 21st century or thereafter with Jesus' second coming.

You’re right; there is no verse, but what we do have are signs and prophecies. Those of us who study the things God has foretold us watch current events and stand at the ready. No one knows exactly when Jesus will return, but it will happen at the 7th trumpet after the AC has been here.

s e l a h

 

[mikesw]

What is it you would like to know about my beliefs relevant to this op?

Others answered for you. I was just finding the context which you shared a verse (or couple of verses), namely 1 Corinthians 10:11. I see what you were saying about it. That was a good point.

 

[JoshebB]

You’re right; there is no verse,...

Thank you for answering the question asked.

If there is no verse stating what you say scripture says, why is it you believe something not stated. Why do you believe something that is created from an inferential reading of scripture and not what is explicitly stated? Why is it you believe a theology quite literally invented in the 19th century, and not what Christianity has believed and taught for 21 cnturies?

Or did you not know modern futurism is an invention of the 1800s?

I am quite serious. Before you continue posting a pile of invention FIRST explain to me how it is you prefer inference over what is explicitly stated?

 

[JoshebB]

Others answered for you. I was just finding the context which you shared a verse (or couple of verses), namely 1 Corinthians 10:11. I see what you were saying about it. That was a good point.

Others read my mind and spoke for me on my behalf? I hope you did not take their testimony over my own (or any I might proffer).

 

[JoshebB]

No one knows exactly when Jesus will return, but it will happen at the 7th trumpet after the AC has been here.

s e l a h

If you believe Jesus can return at any time, then you've just contradicted yourself. If you say Jesus cannot return any time and MUST wait on a trumpets sounding, then you've contradicted the long-held, well-established, historical and orthodox doctrine of imminence.

Furthermore, if Jesus returns after "X" then you know when he will return!!! He'll return after "X". This is and has always been a huge problem within modern futurism. Adherents claim to subscribe to the doctrine of imminence (Jesus can return imminently, or at any time), but the eschatology teaches a series of milestone MUST first occur. The land has to be captured, a temple has to be built, a priesthood res-established, and/or animal sacrifices must begin again. A trumpet has to be blown. Jesus cannot and will not return until these events occur according to modern futurism.

No one within modern futurism seems to realize the pile of contradictions they are teaching even though the rest of Christendom has faithfully endeavored to have them look at the problem.

If Jesus can actually return at anytime then he can return before the trumpet is blown.


Prepare yourself before continuing. I used to be a Dispensational Premillennialist and I am unwavering in my ability to point out blatant contradictions like the one in Post 88. I would prefer you not post them. I would prefer you give me NOTHING with which to work. So think before you post. Be just as critical of your own teachings as you are of my posts. Be an equal opportunity critic. Do not be a biased, prejudiced critic because that will only lead to contradictions and providing me with evidence. Try to anticipate any and all possible cricitism and then post in a manner that avoids all of those potential problems.

Otherwise, you will get very frustrated with my posts and start calling me names or start changing the subject. When you do that I will point that out, too.


So let's start with the current problem. Show me you can and will address your own problems as they arise without delay, diversion, digression, or any other subterfuge. If Jesus comes after the 7th trumpet, then everyone does know when he'll return. Yes? We may not know when the 7th trumpet sounds but the minute it does sound, we know Jesus is coming. Yes?

If the answer is "yes," then go back and correct the statement, "No one knows exactly when Jesus will return..." Show me you can self-correct. Show me you will bow to reason (and correctly rendered scripture). Otherwise, do not waste my time because you're not really participating in a discussion.


And I hope, "No one knows exactly when Jesus will return," was not taken from Matthew 24 because that is not what Matthew 24 actually states.


.

 

[Selah]

Thank you for answering the question asked.

If there is no verse stating what you say scripture says, why is it you believe something not stated. Why do you believe something that is created from an inferential reading of scripture and not what is explicitly stated? Why is it you believe a theology quite literally invented in the 19th century, and not what Christianity has believed and taught for 21 cnturies?

Or did you not know modern futurism is an invention of the 1800s?

I am quite serious. Before you continue posting a pile of invention FIRST explain to me how it is you prefer inference over what is explicitly stated?

You need eyes to see and ears to hear. Uh-oh, I’m inferring. Never mind.

 

[Selah]

If you believe Jesus can return at any time, then you've just contradicted yourself. If you say Jesus cannot return any time and MUST wait on a trumpets sounding, then you've contradicted the long-held, well-established, historical and orthodox doctrine of imminence.

Furthermore, if Jesus returns after "X" then you know when he will return!!! He'll return after "X". This is and has always been a huge problem within modern futurism. Adherents claim to subscribe to the doctrine of imminence (Jesus can return imminently, or at any time), but the eschatology teaches a series of milestone MUST first occur. The land has to be captured, a temple has to be built, a priesthood res-established, and/or animal sacrifices must begin again. A trumpet has to be blown. Jesus cannot and will not return until these events occur according to modern futurism.

No one within modern futurism seems to realize the pile of contradictions they are teaching even though the rest of Christendom has faithfully endeavored to have them look at the problem.

If Jesus can actually return at anytime then he can return before the trumpet is blown.


Prepare yourself before continuing. I used to be a Dispensational Premillennialist and I am unwavering in my ability to point out blatant contradictions like the one in Post 88. I would prefer you not post them. I would prefer you give me NOTHING with which to work. So think before you post. Be just as critical of your own teachings as you are of my posts. Be an equal opportunity critic. Do not be a biased, prejudiced critic because that will only lead to contradictions and providing me with evidence. Try to anticipate any and all possible cricitism and then post in a manner that avoids all of those potential problems.

Otherwise, you will get very frustrated with my posts and start calling me names or start changing the subject. When you do that I will point that out, too.


So let's start with the current problem. Show me you can and will address your own problems as they arise without delay, diversion, digression, or any other subterfuge. If Jesus comes after the 7th trumpet, then everyone does know when he'll return. Yes? We may not know when the 7th trumpet sounds but the minute it does sound, we know Jesus is coming. Yes?

If the answer is "yes," then go back and correct the statement, "No one knows exactly when Jesus will return..." Show me you can self-correct. Show me you will bow to reason (and correctly rendered scripture). Otherwise, do not waste my time because you're not really participating in a discussion.


And I hope, "No one knows exactly when Jesus will return," was not taken from Matthew 24 because that is not what Matthew 24 actually states.


.

You haven’t studied the book of Revelation. Why should I waste my time with you?

 

[JoshebB]

You need eyes to see and ears to hear. Uh-oh, I’m inferring. Never mind.

You haven’t studied the book of Revelation. Why should I waste my time with you?

I have read every all the ECFs in chronological order, all the major teachers of Dispensational Premillennialism for the last two centuries (since the inception of modern futurism, discussed these matters with some of them in person, read more than two dozen commentaries on Revelation from a variety of eschatological viewpoints and read the book of Revelation from beginning to end countless times, including in more than a half dozen translations. That was a very foolish assumption to post.

You're not inferring. You're posting falsehood. I meant what I said.

Thank you for your time.