When You See JERUSALEM Surrounded By Armies, Luke 21

[mikesw]

The fact that you speak of it as out of the 1800s shows your understanding is quite shallow. You would be surprised how early in church history you can find what a futurist talks about. Such as the pseudo ephraim from the 5th - 8th centuries. It not only speaks to a rapture, which means that someone understood exactly what that meant back then, it gives a deep exposition on the antichrist and the abomination of desolation. It's actually DEEPER then most dispensationalists go. A LOT deeper. A real eye opener. Part of the reason why I am no longer certain that the temple doesn't have to be rebuilt prior.

you are wrong in your rejection of my observation. I appreciate your studies in finding earlier views but that is not my interest here. It is the Scofield bible that made the view common in our culture. You just sought deeper basis for your eschatology.

The roots of misconception start with the second century writers and continues to this day as noted in an article by Thomas Lea. For Tertullian, there was an expectancy for an anti-Christ and for the breakup of the Roman Empire. Some were expecting an end at the 6000th year. I propose they had even fewer resources than we have such that they formed their views with insufficient understanding of the OT prophets and the judgment of Israel along with the transition to the Messianic era that defines the prophecies of the NT.
I hold to Rev 20:7-15 as the remaining events explicit in prophecy but am open to the possibility there are other points revealed.

Thomas Lea, A Survey Of The Doctrine Of The Return Of Christ The Ante-Nicene Fathers, JETS 29/2 (June 1986) 163-177

 

[JLB]

Right. This is the Day of the Lord, when Jesus Christ returns as King of kings and Lord of lords.

Yes. Just like Matthew 24.

 

[armylngst]

you are wrong in your rejection of my observation. I appreciate your studies in finding earlier views but that is not my interest here. It is the Scofield bible that made the view common in our culture. You just sought deeper basis for your eschatology.

Actually there were a lot of people who wrote this. Just because Darby brought it out again does not mean he invented it, as you were claiming. You would be surprised just how much of what Darby said is out there from long before he was even born, if one were to actually study. There are quite a few papers out there that have found quite a few times where it comes up. As for as premillennialism goes, there is a 2nd or 3rd century person who came right out and said it was understood to be the orthodox view of the day. (it could have been 4th century...)

The roots of misconception start with the second century writers and continues to this day as noted in an article by Thomas Lea. For Tertullian, there was an expectancy for an anti-Christ and for the breakup of the Roman Empire. Some were expecting an end at the 6000th year. I propose they had even fewer resources than we have such that they formed their views with insufficient understanding of the OT prophets and the judgment of Israel along with the transition to the Messianic era that defines the prophecies of the NT.
I hold to Rev 20:7-15 as the remaining events explicit in prophecy but am open to the possibility there are other points revealed.

I believe there is a portion of Revelation that hasn't happened yet, because, while the technology exists today to make it possible... it wasn't until today. I have a feeling that AI is going to play a huge role, because, with AI we are attempting to create a form of life that is a reflection/in the image of... us. So antithetical to God's creation. Man trying to play God. Perhaps one of these life like humans with AI will be the image of the beast... literally? They already made an attempt with an online AI bot that looked like the person running for office, and supposedly answered questions as he would.

Thomas Lea, A Survey Of The Doctrine Of The Return Of Christ The Ante-Nicene Fathers, JETS 29/2 (June 1986) 163-177

Ignatius was the earliest to speak on the Return of Christ, and he was a disciple of the apostle John. The issue is that when you look back that far, they have/had first hand/second hand information. They had John in their midst. They had Paul. They had Peter. And then you had their disciples. The disciples of John were all premillennialists with a dispensational disposition. So much so that Eusebius kind of insulted Polycarp's disciple in his book. Polycarp was a disciple of John as was Ignatius. Papias was a disciple of Polycarp as was Irenaeus. So they learned what Polycarp learned from John, as well as their own studies.

 

[mikesw]

Actually there were a lot of people who wrote this. Just because Darby brought it out again does not mean he invented it, as you were claiming. You would be surprised just how much of what Darby said is out there from long before he was even born, if one were to actually study. There are quite a few papers out there that have found quite a few times where it comes up. As for as premillennialism goes, there is a 2nd or 3rd century person who came right out and said it was understood to be the orthodox view of the day. (it could have been 4th century...)

I believe there is a portion of Revelation that hasn't happened yet, because, while the technology exists today to make it possible... it wasn't until today. I have a feeling that AI is going to play a huge role, because, with AI we are attempting to create a form of life that is a reflection/in the image of... us. So antithetical to God's creation. Man trying to play God. Perhaps one of these life like humans with AI will be the image of the beast... literally? They already made an attempt with an online AI bot that looked like the person running for office, and supposedly answered questions as he would.

Ignatius was the earliest to speak on the Return of Christ, and he was a disciple of the apostle John. The issue is that when you look back that far, they have/had first hand/second hand information. They had John in their midst. They had Paul. They had Peter. And then you had their disciples. The disciples of John were all premillennialists with a dispensational disposition. So much so that Eusebius kind of insulted Polycarp's disciple in his book. Polycarp was a disciple of John as was Ignatius. Papias was a disciple of Polycarp as was Irenaeus. So they learned what Polycarp learned from John, as well as their own studies.

I do suggest people who follow the modern premil concepts will likely see events happening per the Scofield eschatology but that is because that view was made with the intent of creating the image that such view was a decent interpretation of Revelation and Matthew 24. I fit this deception as part of the Rev 20:7-10 effort of Satan. I do expect that God will intervene as per Rev 20:7-10 when the premil people might expect the Messiah.
I am skeptical how much Polycarp could be in contact with John the apostle. A quick look at The Epistle Of Polycarp To The Philippians looks rather cliche to Paul and the gospels without anything apparently with an updated insight after the fall of the temple. So, there is not much benefit in what he shares toward eschatology.

 

[civic]

Actually there were a lot of people who wrote this. Just because Darby brought it out again does not mean he invented it, as you were claiming. You would be surprised just how much of what Darby said is out there from long before he was even born, if one were to actually study. There are quite a few papers out there that have found quite a few times where it comes up. As for as premillennialism goes, there is a 2nd or 3rd century person who came right out and said it was understood to be the orthodox view of the day. (it could have been 4th century...)

I believe there is a portion of Revelation that hasn't happened yet, because, while the technology exists today to make it possible... it wasn't until today. I have a feeling that AI is going to play a huge role, because, with AI we are attempting to create a form of life that is a reflection/in the image of... us. So antithetical to God's creation. Man trying to play God. Perhaps one of these life like humans with AI will be the image of the beast... literally? They already made an attempt with an online AI bot that looked like the person running for office, and supposedly answered questions as he would.

Ignatius was the earliest to speak on the Return of Christ, and he was a disciple of the apostle John. The issue is that when you look back that far, they have/had first hand/second hand information. They had John in their midst. They had Paul. They had Peter. And then you had their disciples. The disciples of John were all premillennialists with a dispensational disposition. So much so that Eusebius kind of insulted Polycarp's disciple in his book. Polycarp was a disciple of John as was Ignatius. Papias was a disciple of Polycarp as was Irenaeus. So they learned what Polycarp learned from John, as well as their own studies.

That makes Preterism very questionable coming from Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus. Those closest to the time of John.

 

[mikesw]

That makes Preterism very questionable coming from Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus. Those closest to the time of John.

It seems that the early writers were more interested in church guidance and doctrines -- applying concepts looking forward in application to the primarily-gentile church. They do not seem generally interested in what happened to the Jews and the temple but perhaps finding some details of Matt 24 (Luke 21, Mark 13) as having some application to gentiles. The development of eschatological ideas then generally lacks a connection to the first century events and then continues without that foundation. Everything then becomes speculative just as much as it is today.
We can ask further why little if any content of Revelation appears in discussions if John has written it and Polycarp and others were disciples of John. In part it seems Revelation was not of interest to them and is a cause of its neglect.
I prefer to follow the strict timeline of Daniel as the basis for understanding Matthew 24 (Luke 21, Mark 13) and Revelation. Scripture bears witness of itself better than writers who were interested more in current guidance for the church in subsequent centuries. At least it is worth considering Daniel's clear timeline.

 

[Selah]

It seems that the early writers were more interested in church guidance and doctrines

Hi, Mike. Let’s always keep in mind that the Holy Bible is the inspired Word of God. The author is YHVH.

s e l a h

 

[mikesw]

Hi, Mike. Let’s always keep in mind that the Holy Bible is the inspired Word of God. The author is YHVH.

s e l a h

That is my key guide indeed. That is why I was saying to pay attention to the timeline of Daniel more than even the second century writings.

 

[mikesw]

Too much speaks of the first century fulfillment

Basically Daniel revealed the seventy weeks for the repentance of the people of Israel and then 3.5 years of trouble (refiners' fire) for the saints/Christians. That happened.
Daniel spoke of the fall of the city and the temple ( Dan 9:26)
Matthew follows the structure given in Daniel #Matthew and Daniel
Malachi 3 shows that judgment would soon happen after John the Baptist appeared
John the Baptist preached to repent since the kingdom of God was at hand (Matt 3:1-3)
Matt 3:7 shows that the Jewish leaders were the seed of the serpent (Gen 3:15)
Jesus said these things would happen in that generation (Matt 24:34)
Dan 7:13-27 shows that Christ would receive the kingdom and the Christians with him.
Daniel 2:44 shows the kingdom of God would start out of the midst of the Roman empire
Matt 16:28 says “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.”

Christ's coming in judgment happened along with him coming in his kingdom. These had to happen in the first century whether or not people think the kingdom should be visible to people on earth. The judgment of Jerusalem happened as evidenced by the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. This happened in the generation that Jesus said it would happen. That was the sign of the end (Dan 8:19). Deut 32:29 spoke of the latter end. Acts 2:17-21 shows that Joel 2:28-32 is about the last days but extends a benefit to all mankind or all flesh. Deut 32:24-25 indicates this was to come with hunger and dread as in Matt 24:7 and 19-21. The nursing women are mentioned in Deut 32:25 and Matt 24:19. Thus, the continuity of the prophesied demise is evident. It also is seen that Joel 2:32 recommended escape from this just as Jesus told Christians to flee (Matt 24:16-20 ).

All that had happened in accord with these prophecies ought to be the baseline for interpreting the less obvious details of fulfillment that happened. If there are prophecies that do not fit in this timeline, those can be explored for the ways those prophecies remain relevant.

 

[armylngst]

I do suggest people who follow the modern premil concepts will likely see events happening per the Scofield eschatology but that is because that view was made with the intent of creating the image that such view was a decent interpretation of Revelation and Matthew 24. I fit this deception as part of the Rev 20:7-10 effort of Satan. I do expect that God will intervene as per Rev 20:7-10 when the premil people might expect the Messiah.
I am skeptical how much Polycarp could be in contact with John the apostle. A quick look at The Epistle Of Polycarp To The Philippians looks rather cliche to Paul and the gospels without anything apparently with an updated insight after the fall of the temple. So, there is not much benefit in what he shares toward eschatology.

John is the reason that Polycarp was.... the bishop of Smyrna. It is where John went after his exile to Patmos was over to publish Revelation (and perhaps his other epistles). If you were someone's disciple back then, you basically lived with them. (Like Jesus and the 12)