I ain’t gettin’ too hung up on the timeline. The preterist view does make sense to me.
This is what Paul taught about the Preterest view. " Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some." 2Timothy 2:18 He called it profane and vain babblings.
Was Paul referring specifically to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple, which is clearly specifically what I was referring to regarding the preterist view…? Or was Paul referring to something completely different than that…?
Yes, double fulfillment is common in Bible prophecy.
I ain’t gettin’ too hung up on the timeline. The preterist view does make sense to me.
This is what Paul taught about the Preterest view. " Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some." 2Timothy 2:18 He called it profane and vain babblings.
Was Paul referring specifically to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple, which is clearly specifically what I was referring to regarding the preterist view…? Or was Paul referring to something completely different than that…?
Yes, double fulfillment is common in Bible prophecy.
From Paul’s specific reference above, it seems he was clearly specifically referring to something other than the pending destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple, both of which absolutely and unequivocally happened just as Jesus predicted it would.
I ain’t gettin’ too hung up on the timeline. The preterist view does make sense to me.
This is what Paul taught about the Preterest view. " Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some." 2Timothy 2:18 He called it profane and vain babblings.
Was Paul referring specifically to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple, which is clearly specifically what I was referring to regarding the preterist view…? Or was Paul referring to something completely different than that…?
Yes, double fulfillment is common in Bible prophecy.
That's not what Preterists believe. They believe that the prophesies of Matthew 24 have already been fully fulfilled. They believe that Jesus arose from the grave, but not bodily. Preterism teaches that the 7 year tribulation period was from AD 63 to AD 70. Did Jesus return yet? Don't ask a Preterist. There's a spiritualization of events that are meant to be taken literal. Most christians believe that the temple was destroyed already. That doesn't mean we "have a preterist view." If antlers is a preterist, fine. People can believe what they want. I just wouldn't go attend their church.
I just think it makes sense that Jesus was predicting the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple. That’s all. And about 40 years later, it happened just as He said it would.
Jesus' main audience was the Jews. He left spreading the word to the Gentiles to others, mainly Paul. 70 AD was the end of Judaism as it was practiced at the time and Jesus fulfilled the law. All end times prophecies weren't fulfilled in 70, however. There are too many of them in the Bible that haven't happened yet. The appearance of the anti-Christ and the mark of the beast haven't happened, just to name a couple. And most certainly, every eye has NOT seen the return of Christ to reign on earth. I sure don't see him on any earthly throne.
“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” ― George Orwell
It's not over when you lose. It's over when you quit.
I ain’t gettin’ too hung up on the timeline. The preterist view does make sense to me.
This is what Paul taught about the Preterest view. " Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some." 2Timothy 2:18 He called it profane and vain babblings.
Was Paul referring specifically to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple, which is clearly specifically what I was referring to regarding the preterist view…? Or was Paul referring to something completely different than that…?
Yes, double fulfillment is common in Bible prophecy.
From Paul’s specific reference above, it seems he was clearly specifically referring to something other than the pending destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple, both of which absolutely and unequivocally happened just as Jesus predicted it would.
It's interesting that HC quotes 2 Thess. For if you slow down and read it, it is clear that their understanding of the 2nd Coming, the Resurrection and the 'end of the world' are not consistent with what is taught today!
They thought it possible to be alive and on earth AFTER the coming and the resurrection, why did Paul NOT correct that notion!?!? Where did they get that idea? Do most Christians today believe that the 'Mail is going to be delivered' afterwards??
Also Hymeneus and Philetus were indeed wrong because it had not happened YET! It is possible to say the same thing that they said, AFTER the event has happened, and then the statement would be correct.... But then HC knows full well that their statements were made PRIOR to the destruction of Jerusalem....
Last edited by Muffin; 02/28/22.
"...A man's rights rest in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box and the cartridge box..." Frederick Douglass, 1867
Jesus' main audience was the Jews. He left spreading the word to the Gentiles to others, mainly Paul. 70 AD was the end of Judaism as it was practiced at the time and Jesus fulfilled the law. All end times prophecies weren't fulfilled in 70, however. There are too many of them in the Bible that haven't happened yet. The appearance of the anti-Christ and the mark of the beast haven't happened, just to name a couple. And most certainly, every eye has NOT seen the return of Christ to reign on earth. I sure don't see him on any earthly throne.
"and the mark of the beast haven't happened" Try to do any significant business without providing your national ID number. Open a bank account. You are a number.
Patriotism (and religion) is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
I agree with you that if the motivation for being a decent person and doing good is the expectation of a divine reward…so you can win the big prize in the end…then that is a pretty selfish and self-centered motivation.
Jesus’ motivation for saving us was because He loved us. Period. Some folks follow Jesus because they love Him and appreciate what He did for them...THAT is their motivation. And they show their love and devotion for Him by loving and helping others for whom He died. It’s pretty selfless.
I agree with you that if the motivation for being a decent person and doing good is the expectation of a divine reward…so you can win the big prize in the end…then that is a pretty selfish and self-centered motivation.
Jesus’ motivation for saving us was because He loved us. Period. Some folks follow Jesus because they love Him and appreciate what He did for them...THAT is their motivation. And they show their love and devotion for Him by loving and helping others for whom He died. It’s pretty selfless.
I don't doubt you, though I question selfless, as no one does anything for selfless reasons.
I know we'd be screwed if a bunch of so called Christian's suddenly found out there was no reward. That would give them card blanche for a lot of horrible acts, which makes no sense to me.
A lotta people feel as you do regarding these things. And with good reason. People often have pretty good reasons for feeling the way they do about such things.
A lotta people feel as you do regarding these things. And with good reason. People often have pretty good reasons for feeling the way they do about such things.
Do feel about Christ, or do you believe? I believe what I stated, I don't feel it.
A lotta people feel as you do regarding these things. And with good reason. People often have pretty good reasons for feeling the way they do about such things.
Do you feel about Christ, or do you believe? I believe what I stated, I don't feel it.
Maybe a poor choice of a word on my part in my quote above that you responded to. My point was that whether you see things a certain way regarding the subject matter that you and I are discussing, or you believe certain things about the subject matter that you and I are discussing, or you feel a certain way about the subject matter that you and I are discussing…I’m simply saying that I understand that. And that many others can relate to your sentiments as well. And I understand that too. And that you, and the many others that share your sentiments, likely have good reasons for believing as you, and they, do regarding the subject matter that you and I are discussing. That’s all.
As the whether I “feel” or “believe” about Jesus, I believe. I believe absolutely and unequivocally. And I feel it in my cells.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/kl0ojCj.jpg)
