The double-standards of the preterist and why I left that system
- Thread starter Komentaja
- Start date
-
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.
Ahh, got ya. Ok. I was simply expressing my lack of understanding a mere gesture.
Carry on.
MM
He was talking about himself and it was in their immediate future.
But when we have to make the pieces fit in a wrong eschatology it has to be changed to some other person or provide a reason for the building of a new temple.
The Satanic origins of replacement theology, clearly portrayed within scripture, expressed within Preterism-Amillennialism, is worthy of our scorn and hatred, for it removes us Israelis from the plans the Lord clearly outlines in His written word that some have chosen to etherealize into oblivion. Dare we Israelis marginalize those who stand with Preterism, and all Hell would be called upon by them to swallow us up. I love people too much to marginalize them as people, but I will attack and strike down the false doctrines they embrace, and call those doctrines out to reveal their Satanic origins. God is FAR from finished with us Israelis.
MM
MM
Yes, it was indeed in their immediate future, but what makes no sense is the idea that the Lord would not, or could not, put on pause that plan beyond the point that THAT generation did pass away without those things taking place. What power or authority could possibly exist for the Lord to not put on pause what He declared to those standing in His midst? Did that violate some sort of ethic in your estimation? The Lord in times past did indeed place on hold things that He said He would do, and even set aside what He said He was going to do.
We, Israel, FAILED in our duty to be the kings and priests unto the Most High God, and so that the Lord paused the Kingdom plan so that there would be another means through which Gentiles could enter in without having to enter in through Israel, it's an amazing and wonderful state within which we find ourselves today.
So, what REALLY is your beef with all this? Why would you NOT want Gentiles to have the grace extended to them through faith apart from the Law? What's your problem with it all?
MM
In Christ Jesus all has been fulfilled. There are only one people those in Him.
It is not replacement, it is the age and we have a new age, the old is done away.
Christ is King!! He rules in the here and now through His people
Amen and Amen
He was BORN a Jew, yes, and He also said this:
John 4:22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.
Language is important, and Yahshuah was clearly A Jew. See that? He identified Himself as A Jew, not His being the entire nation.
Once again, please read the text for what it says. Spiritualizing Christ into being THE nation, which is no nation if it were only one Person. Come now, let us reason together...
MM
Amalgamation is still a rudiment of replacement theology, no matter you slice it and dice it. It still marginalizes Israel onto the shelf as some sort of relic that no longer has any use to the Lord. That is of Satanic origins. It is precisely his plan to downplay the importance the Lord Himself has placed upon the nation that is still a nation to this day and will be useful in the Hands of Lord who is not under the control of mere human bias and allegorizing.
MM
The Jews were chosen for a purpose and they fulfilled that purpose. Amen. We are grateful to what they endured in ancient times for us, they brought forth the Messiah.
The spiritual is not less it is more.
We need put our time in energy in expanding the Kingdom of God which is in the here and now via all who are believers to bring reconciliation to all who will accept the gift.
The is the true Good News, Christ has overcome the world.
Claiming that Christ IS Israel, given that Israel is currently in rejection of Christ as her Messiah, that creates a picture of pure nonsense. It makes Christ into a divided man, which He is not.
MM
MM
Believe as you will.
I will go with the clear words of Christ Jesus who claimed Himself to be the Beginning and the End.
We cannot expand any kingdom. The Lord will built His Kingdom in the Millennium, all without your interventions or anyone else. Gentiles are not going to be the kings and priests in that Kingdom. Gentiles will not live within the New Jerusalem. That will be inhabited by Israel and Israel alone. The Gentile nations will inhabit the rest of the new earth, NOT the New Jerusalem. Those are not Gentile names over the twelve gates nor on those twelve foundation stones. We, the body of Christ, will live in "Heavenly places" where our blessings are stored from moth rust and thief.
You can go wherever you want, believe whatever you want, but by starting with the literal when reading scripture, we have a more solid basis for eschatology that is backed up by the historic. The shift to allegory and spiritual those things that have tangible roots in the text, that only betrays the subjective nature behind spiritualizing that same text.
MM
His being the beginning and the end has no bearing upon a justification for misrepresentation of the text by way of spiritualizing it into saying whatever you want it to say.
MM
What does "spiritualizing" mean, is God less real because he is Spirit.
Christ Jesus clearly stated "this generation" the people to whom he was speaking.
Revelation is filled with words and phrases of immediacy.... "shortly" etc.,
I will just stay with one body of Christ and the words in scripture.
There is no point debating. I left futurism and not going to deny God's words.
No the reason there has to be another temple is cause immediately after the tribulation that the abomination of desolation sets off Jesus will return. Since He did not in AD70, it wasnt about that.
Plus, in AD70, by the time you saw the abomination of desolation it was too late to escape anyways. The people in Pella didnt do too well either. Jews will be restored after the time of Jacob's trouble, yet they were scattered in AD70, doesn't fit.
So then you are not open to re-examining what scripture states.
While I do not think everything is correct in #12, I think the reasoning on the Temple is solid and cannot be disputed.
Eschatology is just one of those areas where one has to have a real open heart and mind and where one can lay it out before God and say I will follow your lead and not the doctrines of men.
Starting with the big picture down to the all the details and eventually it all fits... one age ended (Mosaic Age) and a new started in the first century. That is the message of scripture.
Is Jesus blinded in part? This is a great doctrine that Christ is the "fulfillment" of Israel, in that Matthew says His Son was called from Egypt, the same verse originally applied to Israel now applied to Christ. Jesus was tested in the wilderness and passed the test.
All of these parallels and typology are true, but it still doesn't get rid of the fact that the Bible teaches that at the return of Jesus some jews will come to Christ and be saved and Jesus will reign from Jerusalem.
I am open to re-examining it, but you need to show me from the Bible. Why didn't Jesus return after the abomination of desolation as the Bible teaches? Why weren't the jews saved when Jesus "returned" in AD70? Why is Jerusalem still trodden under foot by gentiles? Why is the temple mount the place of a mosque? Why aren't we in the new earth yet?
None of these things took place. I am willing to look at it in all sorts of ways and I have no horse in this race, if it already happened, no skin off my bone, but I can see that it didn't so why should I just blindly believe it based on really sloppy evidence? "This generation shall not pass" is really weak evidence. When one could easily just read it as saying: The generation that sees all these things occuring will not pass, the final generation.