Preterism misrepresents Scripture

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,235
1,909
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I disagree with how you are defining the word "parousia" as if it only refers to the nearness of His coming rather than to His coming itself, as in the act of Him descending from heaven to "the air" which will occur as fast as lightning shines from the east to the west.

Parousia is interpreted as Christ being near or coming in both His first coming and His coming again. In both His coming is near/present first through His Spirit in us, and then physically when He comes again.

Strong's Greek Dictionary
3952. παρουσία parousia (parousía)

Search for G3952 in KJVSL; in KJV.

παρουσία parousía, par-oo-see'-ah

from the present participle of G3918; a being near, i.e. advent (often, return; specially, of Christ to punish Jerusalem, or finally the wicked); (by implication) physically, aspect:—coming, presence.


Strong's Greek Dictionary
3918. πάρειμι pareimi (páreimi)

Search for G3918 in KJVSL; in KJV.

πάρειμι páreimi, par'-i-mee

from G3844 and G1510 (including its various forms); to be near, i.e. at hand; neuter present participle (singular) time being, or (plural) property:—come, × have, be here, + lack, (be here) present.

When the disciples asked Him what would be the sign of His coming and the end of the age/world, it was one question.

....., Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

I believe the disciples are asking for a sign to show them of Thy nearness/presence/coming and of the end of the world. For the reasons I've already given I believe the sign was His Spirit in them. Because that is what Christ promised them before He departed. Christ was present or came to them through His Spirit He sent to them.

John 14:16-18 (KJV) And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

What exactly is different about the word "erchomai" compared to the word "parousia"? Please tell me exactly how you interpret Matthew 24:27 and exactly how you interpret Matthew 24:30 so that I can more clearly see what you are intending to say about these words. In my view they both refer to the same time when Jesus descends from heaven, so I see no reason why they can't be used as synonyms.

In vs 27 the coming (parousia) of Christ is only near, but in vs 30 Christ shall appear visibly in heaven, not coming but having physically arrived.
 
Last edited:

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,235
1,909
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
But, you are giving a false definition of the word "parousia". It does not refer to the nearness of His coming (assuming "His coming" refer to His coming/descending bodily from heaven), it refers to His coming itself, as I showed in another post.

As I indicated in that post, if it referred to the nearness of His coming rather than to His coming itself then that would mean Paul was saying in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 that those who are alive and remain unto the nearness of His coming will be caught up with the resurrected dead in Christ to meet the Lord in the air. But, that isn't what Paul was saying. He was saying those who are alive and remain until He actually comes down from heaven will be caught up with the resurrected dead in Christ to meet Him in the air.

It does refer to the nearness of Christ coming to us because the sign of His nearness/coming is through His Spirit, not His physical presence.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
8,826
4,356
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Parousia is interpreted as Christ being near or coming in both His first coming and His coming again. In both His coming is near/present first through His Spirit in us, and then physically when He comes again.

Strong's Greek Dictionary
3952. παρουσία parousia (parousía)

Search for G3952 in KJVSL; in KJV.

παρουσία parousía, par-oo-see'-ah

from the present participle of G3918; a being near, i.e. advent (often, return; specially, of Christ to punish Jerusalem, or finally the wicked); (by implication) physically, aspect:—coming, presence.


Strong's Greek Dictionary
3918. πάρειμι pareimi (páreimi)

Search for G3918 in KJVSL; in KJV.

πάρειμι páreimi, par'-i-mee

from G3844 and G1510 (including its various forms); to be near, i.e. at hand; neuter present participle (singular) time being, or (plural) property:—come, × have, be here, + lack, (be here) present.



....., Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

I believe the disciples are asking for a sign to show them of Thy nearness/presence/coming and of the end of the world. For the reasons I've already given I believe the sign was His Spirit in them. Because that is what Christ promised them before He departed. Christ was present or came to them through His Spirit He sent to them.

John 14:16-18 (KJV) And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.



In vs 27 the coming (parousia) of Christ is only near, but in vs 30 Christ shall appear visibly in heaven, not coming but having physically arrived.

Largely taken from the Full Preterist manual. Sad!
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
8,826
4,356
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It does refer to the nearness of Christ coming to us because the sign of His nearness/coming is through His Spirit, not His physical presence.

Yea right! According to you and Full Preterists, not according to God's Word.
 
Last edited:

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
6,579
2,785
113
74
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Strong’s Definitions [?](Strong’s Definitions Legend)

συντέλεια syntéleia, soon-tel'-i-ah; from G4931; entire completion, i.e. consummation (of a dispensation):—end.

τέλος télos, tel'-os; from a primary τέλλω téllō (to set out for a definite point or goal); properly, the point aimed at as a limit, i.e. (by implication) the conclusion of an act or state (termination (literally, figuratively or indefinitely), result (immediate, ultimate or prophetic), purpose); specially, an impost or levy (as paid):—+ continual, custom, end(-ing), finally, uttermost. Compare G5411.

As you can see here, they mean basically the same thing. They both generally refer to the end (completion, consummation, conclusion, termination) of something. If that doesn't make them synonyms then I don't know what does.

Info on the word syntéleia: G4930 - synteleia - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv)

Info on the word telos: G5056 - telos - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv)
Question: Do the following verses apply to the destruction of Jerusalem; or to the Second Coming?

Matthew 24
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
 

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,235
1,909
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Largely taken from the Full Preterist manual. Sad!

Yea right! According to you and Full Preterists, not according to God's Word.

Paul, Preterists, if I'm not mistaken, view Christ' coming/nearness/presence in AD 70. I do NOT! I believe the SIGN of Christ' coming/nearness/presence came to His saints after Christ ascended to heaven and sent His Spirit to be in man. One can understand and believe the historical evidence of the total destruction Christ said would come to Jerusalem in AD 70 and NOT be a Preterist. Why is that so hard for you to accept.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,235
1,909
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I'm all for exposing how Preterism misrepresents Scripture. I'm not a fan! If we want to be taken seriously we can't act as though the words Christ spoke to first century AD disciples from the Mt of Olives basically has none or little application for them. The Olivet Discourse must be understood as things that would happen exclusively for them, as well as application for the disciples of Christ in every generation coming after them. Much of the Olivet Discourse concerns these words spoken by Christ, "See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." To deny this is not exposing the errors of Preterism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
8,826
4,356
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I'm all for exposing how Preterism misrepresents Scripture. I'm not a fan! If we want to be taken seriously we can't act as though the words Christ spoke to first century AD disciples from the Mt of Olives basically has none or little application for them. The Olivet Discourse must be understood as things that would happen exclusively for them, as well as application for the disciples of Christ in every generation coming after them. Much of the Olivet Discourse concerns these words spoken by Christ, "See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." To deny this is not exposing the errors of Preterism.

Who disagrees with that here?
 

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,235
1,909
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Who disagrees with that here?

You APPEAR to deny these prophetic words Christ spoke of utter destruction came to pass in AD70???? That destruction both before it came and after, speak somewhat exclusively to first century AD disciples. That is not to say things pertaining to them then were written to be an example for the disciples of Christ is every age.
 

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
6,579
2,785
113
74
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Paul Preterists, if I'm not mistaken, view Christ' coming/nearness/presence in AD 70. I do NOT! I believe the SIGN of Christ' coming/nearness/presence came to His saints after Christ ascended to heaven and sent His Spirit to be in man. One can understand and believe the historical evidence of the total destruction Christ said would come to Jerusalem in AD 70 and NOT be a Preterist. Why is that so hard for you to accept.
This case of "preterist paranoia" is indeed bewildering when one realizes that it is not preterism which has defiled most of the Christian Church today, but rather Darby/Scofield fallacy futurism. It is responsible for racist doctrines pitting Jew against Gentile, which it must perpetuate in order to sustain itself. It promotes modernist heresies denying and rejecting doctrines held in unanimity by the historic orthodox defenders of the true faith for more than a millennium. We see its abominations playing out as Jews persecute and annihilate Palestinan Christians, and in the rabid advocacy of warmongering doctrines of the hegemonic neocons in Washington, which threaten to unleash WW3.

While preterism unquestionably poses issues and promotes error, its doctrines are at least based on verifiable history, rather than futurism's, which are based on nothing other than speculation, presumption, delusion, fantasy, and fallacy.

I'm a devout historicist. But in a choice between preterism and futurism, I'll take the former, every time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rwb

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,235
1,909
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This case of "preterist paranoia" is indeed bewildering when one realizes that it is not preterism which has defiled most of the Christian Church today, but rather Darby/Scofield fallacy futurism. It is responsible for racist doctrines pitting Jew against Gentile, which it must perpetuate in order to sustain itself. It promotes modernist heresies denying and rejecting doctrines held in unanimity by the historic orthodox defenders of the true faith for more than a millennium. We see its abominations playing out as Jews persecute and annihilate Palestinan Christians, and in the rabid advocacy of warmongering doctrines of the hegemonic neocons in Washington, which threaten to unleash WW3.

While preterism unquestionably poses issues and promotes error, its doctrines are at least based on verifiable history, rather than futurism's, which are based on nothing other than speculation, presumption, delusion, fantasy, and fallacy.

I'm a devout historicist. But in a choice between preterism and futurism, I'll take the former, every time.

Other than claiming that Amillennialism is truth, I never lay claim to any specific eschatological perspective. I do however believe that what is written in Scripture not only became past history is also coming to pass throughout redemptive history. Not sure if that makes me a historicist, devout or otherwise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
6,579
2,785
113
74
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Other than claiming that Amillennialism is truth, I never lay claim to any specific eschatological perspective. I do however believe that what is written in Scripture not only became past history is also coming to pass throughout redemptive history. Not sure if that makes me a historicist, devout or otherwise.
With futurism by far the greatest adversary, it is more than lamentable that we exhaust ourselves over lesser issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rwb

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
11,658
4,732
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I truly enjoy having these discussions, and I'm not opposed to engaging in rowdy, but civil debates. What I find troubling is when the discussion devolves into name calling and false accusations, (which we are ALL guilty of) especially from those who are mostly familiar with the Biblical doctrine one endorses.
Sure. The discussion between you and me hasn't included any name calling or false accusations. I can deal with false accusations if someone just mistakenly misunderstands what the other said despite at least making an effort to understand it. But, if someone makes a false accusation purposely or because they didn't bother to pay close attention to what the other person is saying, then that bothers me.

I'm sorry my understanding of 1Co 15 is baffling to you.
Nothing to be sorry about. You are trying to explain the best you can, so it's possible that I just can't make sense of what you believe about this and there's nothing I can do about it. But, I'll read the rest of your post and see if I'm able to understand your explanation.

I was with you until you said, "The context here (vs 20) is the bodily resurrection of the dead." Paul doesn't mention the bodily resurrection of the dead until the last trump sounds.
I don't understand how you are coming to this conclusion.

1 Corinthians 15:20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.

You don't think this is referring to Christ's bodily resurrection from the dead? I believe it clearly is.

This verse establishes the context of what Paul proceeds to talk about afterwards.

Christ is the firstfruits of those who have physically died in faith. Because physical death came by man (Adam), so too by man (Christ) comes the resurrection of the dead. Since Christ has been raised from the dead, through Him these dead saints have been spiritually resurrected to heaven.
What does being "spiritually resurrected to heaven" mean? I understand the concept of our spirits and souls going to heaven when we die, but what does being "spiritually resurrected to heaven" mean? A resurrection involves going from being dead to alive. The spirits/souls of physically dead saints don't get resurrected since they never die.

And are you somehow missing that Paul indicates that the dead in Christ would be resurrected "when he comes"? What do you think he meant by that? To me, he's clearly talking about the second coming of Christ. That is when the dead will be raised. They are not resurrected in any way, shape or form immediately after death.

Paul tells us that when a man physically dies in Christ, his/her body is sown a natural body, but it is raised a spiritual body. Because there is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

1 Corinthians 15:44 (KJV) It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

If Paul were talking about the physical bodily resurrection that shall be when the last trump sounds, why would he say when the body of the saints dies it is raised a spiritual body?
Paul tells us no such thing. Again, he taught that it will happen when Christ comes again.

Our resurrected bodies are sown mortal & corruptible, but in the resurrection they will be resurrected immortal and incorruptible. That describes being raised physical not spiritual. Then the saints will once again be as in the beginning before sin and death entered in. Immortal & incorruptible physical body, with spirit, a complete living soul.
No, I believe you are completely mistaken about this.

1 Corinthians 15:35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? 36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: 37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain: 38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body. 39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. 40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. 42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

What Paul was doing here in this passage was contrasting the "natural body" that we currently have with the "spiritual body" that we will have one day. What you seem to be missing is that he was not contrasting a physical body with a spiritual body, but rather was contrasting a natural body with a spiritual body. Jesus had a spiritual body after being resurrected and, yet, He could eat food and be touched and so on. So, a spiritual body does not imply that it's completely non-physical.

So, what Paul was doing there was contrasting our current mortal, corruptible, dishonorable, weak, natural bodies with the immortal, incorruptible, glorious, powerful and spiritual bodies we will have when Jesus comes again. I highlighted the descriptions of our current bodies in red in contrast with the description of the bodies we will have in blue to show how Paul was contrasting the two in verses 42-44.

So what does Paul mean when he says, there is both a natural body (physical/flesh/bone) and a spiritual body (heavenly/celestial/of heaven)? Christ as the firstfruits of them that slept redeemed them from physical death, spiritually. IOW they were raised spirit beings, to be as the angels of God in heaven, where they can die no more (Mt 22:30). This is a depiction of the first resurrection man must have part in to overcome the second death. These who died in faith before Christ came waited in the grave (Abraham's bosom Lu 16:22) for Christ to come and take them with Him to heaven. That's why Paul was anxious to be absent from his body and present in heaven with the Lord (2Cor 5:6-8).
While I, of course, agree with you on how someone has part in the first resurrection, that is simply not what Paul is talking about in 1 Corinthians 15. Again, he's talking about something that will happen "when he comes" (1 Cor 15:22), which is a reference to when Jesus comes again in the future.

Being made alive in Christ, in our own order for each who in physical life have part in the resurrection life of Christ, the first resurrection, are spiritually raised through the presence or coming (parousia) of Christ through His Spirit in us.
You're missing that Paul indicates that the dead in Christ are all made alive at the same time "when he comes". That lines up with what Paul taught later in the chapter as well as in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17. Why wouldn't you use these other scriptures to aid your understanding of 1 Cor 15:20-23? The order Paul gave has to do with the fact that Jesus was the first to be bodily resurrected unto bodily immortality. Next in order is not each person individually when they die, but rather all of the dead in Christ being bodily raised unto bodily immortality "when he comes".

I believe your understanding of the word "parousia" is flawed. It's not a reference to the coming of Christ through His Spirit in us. It's a reference to His future second bodily coming from heaven.
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
11,658
4,732
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Then we physically die (the end), it is by His coming or presence through His Spirit in this age that He has delivered up the Kingdom to God, the Father and put down all rule, authority and power, and since His ascension. He is now reigning from heaven in a Kingdom that shall never be destroyed, where He was given power and everlasting dominion. The last enemy, death shall not be destroyed until the last trump sounds. But every other enemy was already vanquished by His life, death, resurrection and ascension.

Daniel 7:13-14 (KJV) I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

1 Corinthians 15:22-26 (KJV)
For as in Adam all die,even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
Had to divide up my response into two posts because of going over the character limit.

He has not yet delivered up the kingdom to God the Father and has not yet put down all rule, authority and power. He does not do that until He comes and destroys His enemies at the end of the age. It is not until then at the end of the age that believers will "shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father" (Matthew 13:43).

I appreciate you taking the time to further explain your view to me, but I'm afraid I still disagree with it.
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
11,658
4,732
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Parousia is interpreted as Christ being near or coming in both His first coming and His coming again. In both His coming is near/present first through His Spirit in us, and then physically when He comes again.
It never is used to describe Him as being near/present though His spirit in us. When used in reference to Jesus it always refers to His bodily second coming. It is a word used to describe the act of Him coming/descending from heaven towards earth (but not all the way to earth, of course, since we will meet Him "in the air").

....., Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

I believe the disciples are asking for a sign to show them of Thy nearness/presence/coming and of the end of the world. For the reasons I've already given I believe the sign was His Spirit in them.
Where does Jesus indicate that the sign of His coming "was His Spirit in them" within the Olivet Discourse? Surely, He would have specifically explained that the giving of "His Spirit" was the sign of His coming if that was the case. Yet, I don't see that He said that anywhere.

Because that is what Christ promised them before He departed. Christ was present or came to them through His Spirit He sent to them.

John 14:16-18 (KJV) And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
I understand that He promised to come to them through His Spirit and we know that happened on the day of Pentecost. But, the Olivet Discourse is not about that. The word "come" in verse 18 of that passage is not parousia, by the way.

In vs 27 the coming (parousia) of Christ is only near, but in vs 30 Christ shall appear visibly in heaven, not coming but having physically arrived.
I completely disagree. What verse 27 is saying is that once time comes for Him to come back, it will happen very quickly like how lightning flashes very quickly from the east to the west. He's not going to take His sweet time descending from heaven to the earth's atmosphere. It will happen very quickly. That's all He was saying in verse 27.
 
Last edited:

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
11,658
4,732
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This case of "preterist paranoia" is indeed bewildering when one realizes that it is not preterism which has defiled most of the Christian Church today, but rather Darby/Scofield fallacy futurism. It is responsible for racist doctrines pitting Jew against Gentile, which it must perpetuate in order to sustain itself. It promotes modernist heresies denying and rejecting doctrines held in unanimity by the historic orthodox defenders of the true faith for more than a millennium. We see its abominations playing out as Jews persecute and annihilate Palestinan Christians, and in the rabid advocacy of warmongering doctrines of the hegemonic neocons in Washington, which threaten to unleash WW3.

While preterism unquestionably poses issues and promotes error, its doctrines are at least based on verifiable history, rather than futurism's, which are based on nothing other than speculation, presumption, delusion, fantasy, and fallacy.

I'm a devout historicist. But in a choice between preterism and futurism, I'll take the former, every time.
I don't want to speak for WPM, so he can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think he thinks that preterism is a bigger problem than futurism. I know I don't. But, since it is a problem, then it's worth discussing, isn't it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rwb

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
11,658
4,732
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Question: Do the following verses apply to the destruction of Jerusalem; or to the Second Coming?

Matthew 24
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
I'm a bit surprised that you wouldn't already know how I interpret those verses since I've commented on them so many times in the past. But, anyway, I apply them to the destruction of Jerusalem. Why do you ask?
 
  • Like
Reactions: WPM

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
11,658
4,732
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It does refer to the nearness of Christ coming to us because the sign of His nearness/coming is through His Spirit, not His physical presence.
1 Thessalonians 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Paul referred here to "the coming of the Lord" and the word "coming" is translated from the Greek word parousia there. You say His parousia refers to the nearness/coming through His Spirit. But, in this passage it refers to the time when He "shall descend from heaven with a shout" at which point "the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air". Do you think this passage is talking about Him coming through His Spirit and not a reference to His bodily second coming?
 
  • Like
Reactions: WPM

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
6,579
2,785
113
74
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I don't want to speak for WPM, so he can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think he thinks that preterism is a bigger problem than futurism. I know I don't. But, since it is a problem, then it's worth discussing, isn't it?
We should be focusing on the greatest problem. The lesser problem is a distractive diversion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rwb

MatthewG

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2021
16,575
5,513
113
34
Fyffe
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
From my own thoughts, if I say "There is a thousand keys on this key chain, but there is only 80", maybe a thousand years can be seen as the same thing; and to take in context that the Revelation was written to a group of people in Asia minor is very specific, especially with things that would shorty come to pass.

You can quote all kinds of scriptures and try to find signs for the end times today, but the only end time is the end time of your life and your last breathe given.

When looking at scripture the Last days started at Pentecost, and I wonder if this is also the time of the binding of satan for a time; so that the Gospel could reach the 'whole world' that they knew.