Preterists - Put up or shutter up

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,786
2,956
113
#61
Since Solomon's temple was the first temple, Herod's temple was considered the second temple since it was in fact a restructuring of the one completed under Ezra-Nehemiah. Therefore a third temple is a necessity to fulfil the prophecy of the Abomination of Desolation followed by the Great Tribulation.

"The Second Temple (Hebrew: בֵּית־הַמִּקְדָּשׁ הַשֵּׁנִי‎‎, Beit HaMikdash HaSheni) was the Jewish Holy Temple which stood on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem during the Second Temple period, between 516 BCE and 70 CE. According to Judeo-Christian tradition, it replaced Solomon's Temple (the First Temple), which was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BCE, when Jerusalem was conquered and part of the population of the Kingdom of Judah was taken into exile to Babylon." (Wikipedia).
,

If you had read the complete post, you would have seen that I said this! However, it is not spelled out in the Bible, anywhere. I also said I could be wrong, but the more I read about this, the more it seems like it is essential for the Jews that Herod's temple only be the second, or there is no need to build a second third temple! In other words, a fourth!

Jesus clearly stated that the temple would be torn down, and Paul says that WE are the temple of the Holy Spirit. Since Jesus was the once for all perfect sacrifice for sin, why do we need a physical temple for animal sacrifices?

"For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins?3 But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year.4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.5 Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said,
“Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired,
but a body have you prepared for me;
6 in burnt offerings and sin offerings
you have taken no pleasure.
7 Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God,
as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’”


8 When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law),9 then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second.10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

15 And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying,
16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them
after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws on their hearts,
and write them on their minds,”


17 then he adds,
“I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.”

18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin." Hebrews 10:1-18

I realize this is outside the dogma box, just throwing it out there!
 
Last edited:
Dec 28, 2016
5,455
236
63
#62
But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope.For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep.For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.Therefore comfort one another with these words.[I Thess. 4:13-18]

No where in this passage is this explicitly stated this coming in the cloud is pre-trib. No where. Its an inference at best. It does tell us its His coming again, a fulfillment of Acts 1:11.

It does state those who died and went with to be with Him, will come with Him to be renuited with their new glorified bodies.

But I don't wanna hijack the thread about a pre-, mid-, post-trib rapture of the saints. I offer you my apology.
 
Last edited:

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,058
13,749
113
#63
Jesus clearly stated that the temple would be torn down, and Paul says that WE are the temple of the Holy Spirit. Since Jesus was the once for all perfect sacrifice for sin, why do we need a physical temple for animal sacrifices?
It is really immaterial as to how one enumerates this coming temple. But you are confusing two entirely separate issues: (1) the nature of the Church and the individual believer and (2) the temple which must stand in Jerusalem so that the Antichrist (the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition) can desecrate it and claim that he is God from within that temple.

On one hand we have a spiritual "temple" in that the Holy Spirit dwells within every believer, and hence in the Body of Christ (which is the Church). This is not visible to anyone except God, and actually the Church is the Body, the Bride, and the Building (temple) of Christ.

On the other hand, there must be a physical "bricks and mortar" temple in Jerusalem in the future for prophecy to be fulfilled (2 Thess 2:4): Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Naturally, this temple has nothing to do with Christians or the finished work of Christ since it is built by unbelieving Jews.
 
Last edited:
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,401
113
#64
Pre what.......I love all of these coined phrases made by men.....especially the ones I come up with............ hahahah ;)
 

Locutus

Senior Member
Feb 10, 2017
5,928
685
113
#66
I realize this is outside the dogma box, just throwing it out there!
I don't see how.

Acts 7:48 “However, the Most High does not dwell in houses made by human hands; as the prophet says.

God is not going to dwell in another temple ever.
 
Dec 28, 2016
5,455
236
63
#67
I don't see how.

Acts 7:48 “However, the Most High does not dwell in houses made by human hands; as the prophet says.

God is not going to dwell in another temple ever.
That's not what's being debated. They are saying the temple rebuilt is for the AC and not God.
 

Locutus

Senior Member
Feb 10, 2017
5,928
685
113
#68
That's not what's being debated. They are saying the temple rebuilt is for the AC and not God.
This is the claim SG:

"the temple which must stand in Jerusalem so that the Antichrist (the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition) can desecrate it and claim that he is God from within that temple."




How can the anti-christ (another myth) desecrate a temple without God in it?

These people conflate and confuse the terms "man of sin" and anti-christ, they can't even get that right.
 

Ahwatukee

Senior Member
Mar 12, 2015
11,159
2,375
113
#69
That's not the issue. Paul, Jude, and John say (by Divine inspiration) that at His second coming Christ comes WITH His saints (and angels). But how could He come with His saints unless He had first come FOR His saints? And if you are suggesting that the Resurrection/Rapture and the battle of Armageddon all occur at the same time, not only would that be preposterous, but it would violate Scripture since there is absolutely no biblical basis for making such a bizarre assumption.

The truth (for those who want to the truth) is that Christ comes FIRST for His saints at the Resurrection/Rapture and later on -- AFTER the Judgment Seat of Christ and the Marriage of the Lamb -- He comes WITH His saints and angels in fiery judgment.

God bless you for continuing to contend for the truth!

In regards to the Lord returning with those who will have been previously resurrected and the living being changed and caught up, the following is another scripture which supports this that many pass over:

"The ten horns you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but who for one hour will receive authority as kings along with the beast. They have one purpose and will give their power and authority to the beast. They will wage war against the Lamb, but the Lamb will triumph over them because he is Lord of lords and King of kings—and with him will be his called, chosen and faithful followers.”


The above is a preview of when the Lord returns to the earth to end the age, where at which time the beast, the ten kings and the rest of the kings of the earth will wage war against the Lord. This is in reference to Armageddon as the Lord is returning to the earth to end the age and with him will be his "called, chosen and faithful followers," which are those who will have previously been resurrect and caught up, the bride/church, who is that army riding on white horses, wearing their fine linen, white and clean, which they will have received at the wedding of the Lamb in heaven, as described in Rev.19:6-8, 14.
 
Last edited:
Dec 28, 2016
5,455
236
63
#70
This is the claim SG:

"the temple which must stand in Jerusalem so that the Antichrist (the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition) can desecrate it and claim that he is God from within that temple."




How can the anti-christ (another myth) desecrate a temple without God in it?

These people conflate and confuse the terms "man of sin" and anti-christ, they can't even get that right.
Well, I am no for sure if the AC is really a man, or symbolic of something else. I can see the papacy en toto being the AC, I can see him being a man.

From what I gather about the groups who hold to the restored temple is these ppl who rebuild it, do so, thinking they're doing God's service by having a temple for their messiah to reside in. They truly believe the AC is their messiah, as they rejected the Christ as being their Saviour.

I just know this..wherever He is, I want to be. I rest in this.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,786
2,956
113
#71
It is really immaterial as to how one enumerates this coming temple. But you are confusing two entirely separate issues: (1) the nature of the Church and the individual believer and (2) the temple which must stand in Jerusalem so that the Antichrist (the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition) can desecrate it and claim that he is God from within that temple.

On one hand we have a spiritual "temple" in that the Holy Spirit dwells within every believer, and hence in the Body of Christ (which is the Church). This is not visible to anyone except God, and actually the Church is the Body, the Bride, and the Building (temple) of Christ.

On the other hand, there must be a physical "bricks and mortar" temple in Jerusalem in the future for prophecy to be fulfilled (2 Thess 2:4): Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Naturally, this temple has nothing to do with Christians or the finished work of Christ since it is built by unbelieving Jews.

That's not what's being debated. They are saying the temple rebuilt is for the AC and not God.
Yes, I see that from the quote in 2 Thess. 2:4, SG!

@Nehemiah6

" [FONT=Helvetica Neue, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]l'adversaire qui s'élève contre tout ce qu'on appelle Dieu ou qu'on adore; il va jusqu'à s'asseoir [comme Dieu] dans le temple de Dieu en se proclamant lui-même Dieu." 2 Thess. 2:4 Second 21
[/FONT]

Oops! You don't speak French? Well, I do, but I do not understand KJV English. So, I had to look it up in a language I can read!

Please, if you want me to read your posts and Scripture verses, put it in a version that I can understand. So, Greek/Hebrew, French, and even German. Or, perhaps modern English might work. (Not speaking of you, SG, but Nehemiah6 who keeps posting in an ancient language. But, I did look it up!

So, people are all excited for this third temple because it will be the home of the anti-Christ? And yet, there was Antiochus IV Epiphanies in 168 BC who was the one who committed the Abomination of Desolation spoken of in Daniel. I guess that doesn't count?

So, I will get back to you on this. I'm off to do some real life things!
 
Dec 28, 2016
5,455
236
63
#72
For my better understanding, will ppl tell me who is pre- and who is post-trib rapturists? Because I know that not all futurists are of the same cloth.
 

valiant

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
126
63
#74
Neither Partial nor Full Preterism are true Bible doctrines. Theopedia has an article on these two theologies, and their errors are quoted below from Theopedia:

"Preterism is a view in Christian eschatology which holds that some or all of the biblical prophecies concerning the Last Days refer to events which took place in the first century after Christ's birth, especially associated with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, meaning past, since this view deems certain biblical prophecies as past, or already fulfilled....

Errors of Partial Preterists (other than the destruction of Jerusalem)

1. Partial Preterism, the older of the two views, holds that prophecies such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the Antichrist, the Great Tribulation, and the advent of the Day of the Lord as a "judgment-coming" of Christ were fulfilled circa 70 AD when the Roman general (and future Emperor) Titus sacked Jerusalem and destroyed the Jewish Temple, putting a permanent stop to the daily animal sacrifices. It identifies "Babylon the great" (Revelation 17-18) with the ancient pagan City of Rome or Jerusalem.

2. Most Partial Preterists also believe the term Last Days refers not to the last days of planet Earth or the last days of humankind, but rather to the last days of the Mosaic covenant which God had exclusively with national Israel until the year AD 70....

3. Partial preterists hold that the New Testament predicts and depicts many "comings" of Christ. They contend that the phrase Second Coming means second of a like kind in a series, for the Scriptures record other "comings" even before the judgment-coming in 70 AD.

4. Partial Preterists believe that the new creation comes in redemptive progression as Christ reigns from His heavenly throne, subjugating His enemies, and will eventually culminate in the destruction of physical death, the "last enemy" (1 Cor 15:20-24).

5. Nearly all Partial Preterists hold to
amillennialism or postmillennialism.

6. Many postmillennial Partial Preterists are also
theonomists in their outlook.


You clearly have little understanding of what many partial preterists believe.
 

Locutus

Senior Member
Feb 10, 2017
5,928
685
113
#75
2 Thess 2:3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,

2 Thess 2:6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed.

So in the above we have the "man of sin" being restrained in the 1st century AD, which means he was living then, but we are supposed to believe he will be revealed when the "third temple" is built 1970 years later and counting.

Who is he Count Dracula?
 
Dec 28, 2016
5,455
236
63
#76
I am post trib/pre-wrath ingathering
So, the saints go through the great trib? I, once being amill, and now hovering somewhere around amill and Chilasm), I think there's no proof(just inferences at best) of the body of Christ being raptured prior to the GT.
 

Ahwatukee

Senior Member
Mar 12, 2015
11,159
2,375
113
#77
So, people are all excited for this third temple because it will be the home of the anti-Christ? And yet, there was Antiochus IV Epiphanies in 168 BC who was the one who committed the Abomination of Desolation spoken of in Daniel. I guess that doesn't count?
Oops on you Angela! Though it is true that Antiochus desecrated the temple, How could the abomination referred to in Dan.9:27 have been fulfilled by Antiocus Epiphanies in 168 BC, when the Lord mentioned it as a future event in Matt.24:15 saying "when you see the abomination spoken of by Daniel the prophet"?

This would demonstrate that the abomination is yet to be fulfilled and will take place in conjunction with the Lord's return to the earth at the end of the age.

We are not excited about a third temple because of the antichrist, but because it demonstrates how close the we are to the Lord coming for his church, which must take place prior to the revealing of that antichrist and building of that third temple.

 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,401
113
#78
So, the saints go through the great trib? I, once being amill, and now hovering somewhere around amill and Chilasm), I think there's no proof(just inferences at best) of the body of Christ being raptured prior to the GT.
I used to believe pre....was raised in a church that crammed it down our throats......too many verses in context that blow it out of the water.....IMO....in 2007 wrote a 212 page book (in my blog) of why I do not buy it....and since then could add another 10 chapters.........no matter...this will be argued until the Parousia of Jesus and we are gathered
 
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
#79
So, the saints go through the great trib? I, once being amill, and now hovering somewhere around amill and Chilasm), I think there's no proof(just inferences at best) of the body of Christ being raptured prior to the GT.
Many of them didn't face all the tribulations. They did as Jesus warned them to do, and fled Jerusalem, and headed up into the hill country.
 
Dec 28, 2016
5,455
236
63
#80
I am reading a book...

Revelation: Four Views by Steven Gregory.

In chapter 8 and STILL not convinced of any eschatlogical system.

Know one thing for sure...dispensationialism is NOT tenable.