The absurdity and heresy of Preterism

  • 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.
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
You can cast ignorant aspirsions on the Romans but the whole world admired their system of law and order. If one fell afoul of the government, punishment was swift, especially if one was not a Roman citizen. For citizens the rules were different which is why Paul was not crucified. I mean if you think they were mean, there is definately your very personal opinion and has no validity in a discussion. To call one party "mean" is fairly juvenile and contributes nothing.

It is a fact that a 90 year old man who no longer can walk and cannot speak poses no threat. None at all. It is a really desperate and silly argument to say they did it cause they were mean.
Actually, I seem to they were just plain mean. End of discussion. I know something about their laws and government (and how and when it changed), what it meant to be a citizen, and other matters. You just know they were "mean."
You want to hear what the Muslims have done to Christians? Then there are how the Anabaptists were treated and how the Catholics treated the believers who dared to have a Bible. We can go on and on. Are they all just plain "mean?"

OK, I give up.


And yet, today's branches of law, the traditions of medicine, the structure of life is based upon the Greeks. Maybe you find the Romans to be fascinating, but those in the loop understand they adopted the ways of Greece, like we all have.
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
Well, these are actually reasons rooted in history and the scripture but you need to call them "excuses" which is pretty disgenuine of you. Your understanding of the Romans is summed up in the juvenile expression "mean" that I more often heard in grade school than university. Again, in one post I mentioned the birth of Polycarp. That was a fact, not my personal opinion. That you think it was my personal opinion is merely your personal opinion. Reminds me of your description of the Romans.


No, these are structural assumptions to assume your points of view. If you tell the same lie enough times it becomes a personal truth!
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
It was in 70 AD and it was very big!


A million Jews being butchered by the Romans were a mere spec to what Alexander the Great did to many Nations. The Ancient Egyptians, Persians, Babylonians, etc and even Rome had done far more damage to hundreds of civilizations before this Jewish event in history. You are blowing up a truly minor incident as if it was the greatest catastrophe of that era. It's beginning to become way too silly for you to go on like this!
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
The problem is God is not communicating to himself but to men and so uses words we understand. The book actually states it is no his servants UNDERSTAND that events that are about to take place. He repeats soon many times. He means in a short time.


And we are still awaiting for just 1 single event that was mentioned to happen. We know the complete facts to the 70 AD Destruction, and not one single thing mentioned in Revelation can be assigned to what happened in 70 AD. Not a single written example matches anything we know from how Josephus explained.

So, how can a Book be used to fit one single event when NOTHING within that Book matches anything that happened from that event?

I know how, just read everything you have posted is how. You just make it up as you go!
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
I don't have a particular belief about when the book of Revelation was written.

I'm not sure what you're referring to that might have been based on a hunch?


Aren't you a follower of Amill or Preterism?
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
that could be the holy Spirit, or it could be some part of your mind of which you are unaware.


on one hand, I have no idea what you're saying.
on the other hand, if I take a guess at what you mean, everyone's beliefs relate to their ideals, I think.


We are creatures of habit. You most likely eat something similar daily for breakfast, even if you try something new for a few other days. You have your favorite shows, movies, books, Scriptures, Biblical Characters and those all relate to who you are. So it is highly doubtful your mind would sway from your awareness.

And yes, we all have idealisms. But if those idealisms (outside that Christ is the only way to God) aren't changing or adapting, it means you have become close minded and unable to learn. And that is the biggest issue with being raised with a set of beliefs versus learning a set a beliefs on your own. The beliefs you learn can adapt. Typically, the beliefs you are ingrained with takes an act of God Himself to change.
 

Nebuchadnezzer

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2019
1,134
205
63
Preterism is an absurd and heretical view of Bible prophecies.
Preterism is no less absurd than futurism. Both doctrines were created by the middle ages Catholic Church in attempt to hide and to deny that the office of pope is the anti-christ.

You attack Preterism, which is one of the doctrines of the Catholic Church, but then you espouse Futurism, another doctrine of the Catholic Church.

NICE!
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
Preterism is no less absurd than futurism. Both doctrines were created by the middle ages Catholic Church in attempt to hide and to deny that the office of pope is the anti-christ.

You attack Preterism, which is one of the doctrines of the Catholic Church, but then you espouse Futurism, another doctrine of the Catholic Church.

NICE!


However, the Doctrine of the pre-Trib rapture is less than 150 years old, not originally conceived by either the first Church, Church Fathers, nor the Catholics. So by your assessment, pre-Trib is an offshoot to Futurism.

But you do agree one day there will be a Second Coming by Christ, Armageddon, and an eventual Judgement Day?
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
You attack Preterism, which is one of the doctrines of the Catholic Church, but then you espouse Futurism, another doctrine of the Catholic Church.
This is a straw man argument. We can totally ignore the Catholic Church and its teachings and develop our doctrines from the Bible itself. Indeed that is the only way to arrive at the truth.

Let's take the absurd idea that the Second Coming of Christ occurred in AD 70 at the destruction of Jerusalem. Now we do not have to go to any extra-biblical source to see that this is totally false. We can simply go to the Bible and look at three passage (although there are many more)

For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Mt 24:27,30)
************************************************************************************************
Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. (Rev 1:7)
************************************************************************************************
And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Jude 1:14,15)

So what are these passage teaching us?
1. The brightness of Christ's Second Coming will be similar to a lightning flash going from east to west (worldwide). The whole earth will be lit up with the brightness and glory of Christ in all His blazing glory.

2. Christ deliberately refers to Himself as "the Son of Man" in this context, since this is how He is described in Daniel when He receives His earthly Kingdom (Daniel 7). And this is exactly what He told the Sanhedrin when they refused to believe that He was their Messiah: Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. (Mt 26:64)

3. Christ will come with "clouds". They are called "clouds of Heaven" since they descend from God's Heaven. These are not clouds of water vapor but clouds of saints and angels (as indicated in Jude). They give the appearance of white clouds since they are all dressed in white and all are radiating glory.

4. All the inhabitants of the earth will fearfully mourn when they see the real, literal, visible, glorious Second Coming, because it is for the purpose of severe judgment -- "to execute judgment" (as indicated in Jude).

5. Which takes takes us to the fact that Christ will come WITH POWER AND GREAT GLORY. At His first coming Christ came in humility and humiliation. But this is the exact opposite. He will come with flaming fire to take vengeance on His enemies. Hence the mourning, weeping, and wailing.

Now no honest person will say that all this has ALREADY happened, because this is the Day of Grace -- "the acceptable year of the Lord". At the Second Coming it will be "the day of vengeance of of God".
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,602
13,861
113
This is a straw man argument.
...
Now no honest person will say...
It's rather funny when you call out another person on a logical fallacy and then make one of your own.
 

Nebuchadnezzer

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2019
1,134
205
63
This is a straw man argument. We can totally ignore the Catholic Church and its teachings and develop our doctrines from the Bible itself. Indeed that is the only way to arrive at the truth.

Let's take the absurd idea that the Second Coming of Christ occurred in AD 70 at the destruction of Jerusalem. Now we do not have to go to any extra-biblical source to see that this is totally false. We can simply go to the Bible and look at three passage (although there are many more)

For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Mt 24:27,30)
************************************************************************************************
Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. (Rev 1:7)
************************************************************************************************
And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Jude 1:14,15)

So what are these passage teaching us?
1. The brightness of Christ's Second Coming will be similar to a lightning flash going from east to west (worldwide). The whole earth will be lit up with the brightness and glory of Christ in all His blazing glory.

2. Christ deliberately refers to Himself as "the Son of Man" in this context, since this is how He is described in Daniel when He receives His earthly Kingdom (Daniel 7). And this is exactly what He told the Sanhedrin when they refused to believe that He was their Messiah: Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. (Mt 26:64)

3. Christ will come with "clouds". They are called "clouds of Heaven" since they descend from God's Heaven. These are not clouds of water vapor but clouds of saints and angels (as indicated in Jude). They give the appearance of white clouds since they are all dressed in white and all are radiating glory.

4. All the inhabitants of the earth will fearfully mourn when they see the real, literal, visible, glorious Second Coming, because it is for the purpose of severe judgment -- "to execute judgment" (as indicated in Jude).

5. Which takes takes us to the fact that Christ will come WITH POWER AND GREAT GLORY. At His first coming Christ came in humility and humiliation. But this is the exact opposite. He will come with flaming fire to take vengeance on His enemies. Hence the mourning, weeping, and wailing.

Now no honest person will say that all this has ALREADY happened, because this is the Day of Grace -- "the acceptable year of the Lord". At the Second Coming it will be "the day of vengeance of of God".
What about the historicist approach to interpreting prophesy, what do you think about this approach?
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
23,778
8,613
113
Right.

(I addressed that in Post #230/#231)

--BEFORE "the beginning of birth pangs," [included in what comes "before" is-->] they are "led away captive into all the nations" (Lk21:24);

--but what comes AFTER "the beginning of birth pangs" [and more of same] is, they shall be gathered "one by one" to worship the Lord in the holy mount, at Jerusalem (Matt24:29-31 / Isaiah 27:13-14), a completely OPPOSITE "end / outcome".



They cannot be the same [at one point in time (i.e. 70ad alone)]
Correct. Because the purpose of the Great Tribulation is to ultimately redeem Israel once and for all. Israel has not been redeemed (yet), therefore the GT has not occurred up to this point in history. But it will and very very soon now.
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
Just to point out one other reason I believe it was Domitian, not Nero, who placed John into Patmos. Who John's Disciples were and when they came onto the scene. The most famous of those Disciples was a man we all know as Polycarp. Interestingly enough, Polycarp was not even born till 69 AD. One year before the 70 AD destruction.

  • Polycarp-Disciple of the Apostle John Polycarp was born around the year AD 69. He is a very important figure in the Early Church era, as his Letter to the Philippians is one of the earliest surviving writings.
Polycarp-Disciple of the Apostle John - History of the Early ...
earlychurch.com/polycarp-disciple-of-the-apostle-john/




From Irenaeus Materials known as : Against Heresies, Irenaeus proves John was exiled by Domitian, released after Domitian died, and attended the same Church that Paul founded in Ephesus until he died!

We have the record of the Book of Revelation that John was on the Isle of Patmos (1:9), and there wrote the Apocalypse. In his Against Heresies Book III, at the end of chapter 3, Irenaeus says, “Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles.” Trajan began to rule in A.D. 98, and John was alive among the people of Ephesus till that time and perhaps a little while after.

In Against Heresies Book V.30.3, Irenaeus writes (declining to try to identify what the number of the beast signifies), “for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, toward the end of Domitian’s reign.” Domitian died in A.D. 96.

As to John’s actual release from Patmos it would likely have been soon after the death of Domitian, as his edicts – such as banishments – would be voided on his death. But we have no accounts of his release.

Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History, III.18.3, and other early church leaders repeat Irenaeus’ account of the writing of the Apocalypse, and John's tenure in Ephesus.





By Irenaeus account, he proves Domitian put John in exile, John wrote the Apocalypse, Domitian died and John was released, John spent rest of his days in the Church of Ephesus!

I think Irenaeus accounts are more factual than any Preterist or Amill's baloney!

Irenaeus says John was exiled by Domitian and was released after Domitian's death. We know John wrote the Apocalypse in Patmos. Therefore, according to Irenaeus accounts, Revelation was never about 70 AD, but about the FUTURE!

Meaning, the word SOON was indeed according to God's timing, not present day!
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
In Against Heresies Book V.30.3, Irenaeus writes (declining to try to identify what the number of the beast signifies), “for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, toward the end of Domitian’s reign.” Domitian died in A.D. 96.

^
Irenaeus proves John kept hidden what the number of the Beast signified, claiming it was not time for it to be revealed. This is in 98 AD

^

So clearly, to think John wrote Revelations in 70 AD is 100% ABSURD!
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
23,778
8,613
113
This is a straw man argument. We can totally ignore the Catholic Church and its teachings and develop our doctrines from the Bible itself. Indeed that is the only way to arrive at the truth.

Let's take the absurd idea that the Second Coming of Christ occurred in AD 70 at the destruction of Jerusalem. Now we do not have to go to any extra-biblical source to see that this is totally false. We can simply go to the Bible and look at three passage (although there are many more)

For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Mt 24:27,30)
************************************************************************************************
Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. (Rev 1:7)
************************************************************************************************
And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Jude 1:14,15)

So what are these passage teaching us?
1. The brightness of Christ's Second Coming will be similar to a lightning flash going from east to west (worldwide). The whole earth will be lit up with the brightness and glory of Christ in all His blazing glory.

2. Christ deliberately refers to Himself as "the Son of Man" in this context, since this is how He is described in Daniel when He receives His earthly Kingdom (Daniel 7). And this is exactly what He told the Sanhedrin when they refused to believe that He was their Messiah: Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. (Mt 26:64)

3. Christ will come with "clouds". They are called "clouds of Heaven" since they descend from God's Heaven. These are not clouds of water vapor but clouds of saints and angels (as indicated in Jude). They give the appearance of white clouds since they are all dressed in white and all are radiating glory.

4. All the inhabitants of the earth will fearfully mourn when they see the real, literal, visible, glorious Second Coming, because it is for the purpose of severe judgment -- "to execute judgment" (as indicated in Jude).

5. Which takes takes us to the fact that Christ will come WITH POWER AND GREAT GLORY. At His first coming Christ came in humility and humiliation. But this is the exact opposite. He will come with flaming fire to take vengeance on His enemies. Hence the mourning, weeping, and wailing.

Now no honest person will say that all this has ALREADY happened, because this is the Day of Grace -- "the acceptable year of the Lord". At the Second Coming it will be "the day of vengeance of of God".
Amen brother. And we all know that any reasonably educated Bible student could do justice to your thesis by supplementing your work with a vast volume of similar Scriptures, all of which make clear the indisputable truth that Jesus Messiah did not return in his prophesied glory at 70 A.D.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
23,778
8,613
113
This thread, like so many before it, has become trench warfare.
I beg to differ. We are making a very good progress here I am encouraged.
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
From Eusebius

With Eusebius (Church History III.13.1) and others we are obliged to place the Apostle's banishment to Patmos in the reign of the Emperor Domitian (81-96). After Domitian's death the Apostle returned to Ephesus during the reign of Trajan, and at Ephesus he died about A.D. 100 at a great age.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,602
13,861
113
I find it interesting that the decryers and naysayers continue to condemn all preterists, but I haven't seen yet where any preterist (other than any on this forum who claim to be) has been quoted. Instead, the evidence is all hearsay.

Step up, gentlemen. Let's have actual evidence for your claims.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,602
13,861
113
I beg to differ. We are making a very good progress here I am encouraged.
No, you're just applauding each other on a victory you have yet to win.
 
Apr 5, 2020
2,273
464
83
^ That's a definite hitting the nail with the head of the hammer!

There is John by 3 Church Fathers accounts he was placed in Patmos by Domitian, that would be around 94 AD, he wrote Revelations, Domitian died and John was released, then John remained a member of the Ephesus Church till he died around 100 AD.

That's 3 solid proofs that Nero did not put John in patmos, so Revelations clearly IS NOT about the 70 AD event!