The end in relation to when Christ initially returns.

[Zao is life]

And if I am one sent (the meaning of the word "apostle")? Then you have blasphemed the Holy Spirit.

IF you were sent, and if you were casting out demons by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit was blasphemed when the Son of God was falsely accused of casting out demons by the power of Ba'alzebub.

But you are not sent.

Your complete misinterpretation (in a number of respects) of Christ's teaching and the teaching of His apostles (His only apostles), even while you claim to be sent to reveal not merely A 'mystery, but THE voice of the seven thunders that John was told not to write, betrays your real status as to what you assert regarding your "knowledge and understanding", putting you squarely in the category of false teachers/prophets.
​

Then you attempt to tell me when I call you out about it, that IF you are sent, then I have blasphemed the Holy Spirit, while you continue to imply all along that you are 'sent'. "So you have just reconfirmed your own real and only status: False prophet.

The Holy Spirit is not blasphemed when someone calls you out about exulting yourself and claiming magnificent things about yourself, claiming to be not merely A, but THE "revealer" of "the mystery of God, as He has declared to His servants the prophets" (which will be) finished when the seventh trumpet is about to sound.

You have just exulted yourself again by claiming someone has blasphemed the Holy Spirit by calling you out for being the false prophet that you are.

Jesus had 12 apostles. You are not one of them.​

 

[ScottA]

IF you were sent, and if you were casting out demons by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit was blasphemed when the Son of God was falsely accused of casting out demons by the power of Ba'alzebub.

But you are not sent.

Your complete misinterpretation (in a number of respects) of Christ's teaching and the teaching of His apostles (His only apostles), even while you claim to be sent to reveal not merely A 'mystery, but THE voice of the seven thunders that John was told not to write, betrays your real status as to what you assert regarding your "knowledge and understanding", putting you squarely in the category of false teachers/prophets.
​

Then you attempt to tell me when I call you out about it, that IF you are sent, then I have blasphemed the Holy Spirit, while you continue to imply all along that you are 'sent'. "So you have just reconfirmed your own real and only status: False prophet.

The Holy Spirit is not blasphemed when someone calls you out about exulting yourself and claiming magnificent things about yourself, claiming to be not merely A, but THE "revealer" of "the mystery of God, as He has declared to His servants the prophets" (which will be) finished when the seventh trumpet is about to sound.

You have just exulted yourself again by claiming someone has blasphemed the Holy Spirit by calling you out for being the false prophet that you are.

Jesus had 12 apostles. You are not one of them.​

Calling someone out by what you have been taught or by your own understanding, does not make your accusations true. On the contrary, such would be a repeat of the actions and assumptions made by the Priests and the Pharisees who caused Christ to be crucified.

And again, you define an "apostle" incorrectly--not biblically. The meaning of the word is simply "one sent", but you have redefined it to be some religious term of private interpretation to the contrary. "The twelve" are not all whom Jesus has sent.

 

[Zao is life]

I think the reason so many deny that Satan was bound by the advent of Christ is because they don't understand what being bound that "he should no longer deceive the nations" means. We must understand how his binding is not literal, but symbolic and it is specific in purpose. Satan is not bound to remove all deception from all the earth. In fact, his ejection from heaven at the birth of Christ tells us Satan is cast to the earth with GREAT wrath to persecute the Church and Her seeds. He had to be spiritually bound, not physically bound because he had power to hold people of the nations who had never heard of Christ in bondage to fear of death.

Actually it's the Amils who don't understand what "deceive the nations" means. But go on ..

Though Satan still has power over this world, and all who are in unbelief by holding them throughout the nations (Gentiles), who had never heard of the Savior in bondage to fear of death, that bondage is broken when the Gospel is preached and heard and people throughout the nations obtain eternal life through Christ. If Satan is not bound the nations of the world (Gentiles) then death would still have power over them because Satan also had the power before Christ to take away the word of the Kingdom that is sown in the hearts of those who hear but don't understand.

If it were true what you are saying above, then everyone would be a believer (because Satan is bound, so no seed can fall by the wayside).

Your words imply that there is absolutely no conscious choice on the part of those individuals who refuse the calling of the Spirit of God when the seed is sown in their hearts - and the assertion you make in this regard implies yet again that Satan is more powerful than God.

The reality though is that individual choices are implied throughout the parable, and Satan is not more powerful than God so that he needed to be bound so that "at least some people" could be saved (which is what your assertion indeed implies).

Satan can still snatch away the Word sown in the hearts of individuals, It's never been any different:

Mark 4
14 The sower sows the Word.
15 And these are those by the wayside, where the Word is sown. And when they hear, Satan comes immediately and takes away the Word that was sown in their hearts.
16 And these are those likewise being sown on stony places; who, when they hear the Word, immediately receive it with gladness.
17 But they have no root in themselves, but are temporary. Afterward when affliction or persecution arises for the Word's sake, they are immediately offended.
18 And these are those being sown among thorns; such as hear the Word,
19 and the cares of this world, and the deceit of riches, and the lust about other things entering in, choke the Word, and it becomes unfruitful.
20 And these are those sown on good ground, who hear the Word and welcome it, and bear fruit, one thirty, one sixty, and one a hundredfold.

Individual choices are implied throughout the parable, and your assertion in this regard implies that Satan is more powerful than God, and individual choices are never involved.​

 

[Zao is life]

Calling someone out by what you have been taught or by your own understanding, does not make your accusations true. On the contrary, such would be a repeat of the actions and assumptions made by the Priests and the Pharisees who caused Christ to be crucified.

And again, you define an "apostle" incorrectly--not biblically. The meaning of the word is simply "one sent", but you have redefined it to be some religious term of private interpretation to the contrary. "The twelve" are not all whom Jesus has sent.

ALL BELIEVERS are sent. Sent to deliver the message they received, a.k.a sharing the gospel.

ONLY the 12 were sent to establish doctrine in the churches.

You are not sent to exult yourself before all the other saints claiming to be sent to reveal "hidden mystery".

End of my talking to you about this. Your false accusation is on record which you leveled against me, accusing me of "blaspheming the Holy Spirit" because I called you a false prophet/teacher (which is what you are when you claim magnificent things about yourself and talk nonsense about revealing hidden mystery, and specifically, the mystery to be revealed when the seventh trumpet is about to sound, which you asserted is "now being revealed by you").​

 

[ScottA]

ALL BELIEVERS are sent. Sent to deliver the message they received, a.k.a sharing the gospel.

ONLY the 12 were sent to establish doctrine in the churches.

You are not sent to exult yourself before all the other saints claiming to be sent to reveal "hidden mystery".

End of my talking to you about this. Your false accusation is on record which you leveled against me, accusing me of "blaspheming the Holy Spirit" because I called you a false prophet/teacher (which is what you are when you claim magnificent things about yourself and talk nonsense about revealing hidden mystery, and specifically, the mystery to be revealed when the seventh trumpet is about to sound, which you asserted is "now being revealed by you").​

Now you make exceptions to your own error. Go figure.

Moreover, while your mouth is still full of accusations, you continue in effect to take away from the words of the book of Revelation of the finish of the mystery of God promised to be well after the twelve were dead and gone at the end of days.

Yes, you should stop.

 

[rwb]

But then 70 AD eventually happened, right? Did that event not cause Christians to leave the area? Which would mean this gives a way for the gospel to spread beyond this region if Christians that were in that region are now in other regions outside of this one. Even if satan was bound when Amils insist he was, 70 AD would have nothing to do with his binding, and that it was basically 70 AD that caused Christians in that region to venture beyond that region, thus allowing the gospel to spread even further. And the next thing you know, over time the gospel has managed to spread globally and that it has zero to do with satan being bound.

Let me ask this. Is satan so powerful that if he isn't bound, he would literally be able to prevent the spreading of the gospel to all nations? Is that what Amils think, that unless he is bound he could actually literally prevent the gospel from spreading to all nations? If Amils don't think that, that seems contradictory in that case if Amils are arguing that satan is bound so that he can't prevent the spreading of the gospel to all nations.

Christians were scattered abroad preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of God long before 70 AD. This was after the first advent of Christ. Saul, who became the Apostle to the Gentiles caused many of them to spread into other nations. It was the cross of Christ that caused persecution and physical death that caused the Gospel to be dispersed unto all the nations of the world (Gentiles). While it's true there were Christians warned to flee from Jerusalem, according to historical records, it was not the destruction of Jerusalem that caused the spread of the Gospel to go into the all the world. The Gospel of Christ could not be sent unto all the nations of the world until Christ literally made atonement for sin, and defeated death. We read of the early Church after the advent of Christ and clearly see His prophetic words beginning to be fulfilled.

Acts 8:1-3 (KJV) And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles. And devout men carried Stephen to his burial, and made great lamentation over him. As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison.

You're not understanding the purpose for Satan's binding. Before he was bound Satan held the nations of the world in bondage to fear of death. All mankind in unbelief is still being held in bondage to that fear. That was true for unbelievers both before and after the advent of Christ. It was by Christ defeating death, and through the eyewitness testimony of Christ's disciples and preaching the Gospel that the bondage to fear of dying has been broken. Christ proved that He was of greater power than Satan because death could not hold Him, nor can it hold whosoever is born again through Him.

There was no Gospel of Christ to proclaim to the nations of the world before the first advent of Christ coming to earth a man.

 

[rwb]

You might want to ask the locusts that once they are released from there, whatever these locust things might be. Referring to Revelation 9 of course. All I know is, that while they are in the pit, the same pit satan will be in, it's as if they don't even exist. If satan is currently in this same pit, why isn't it as if he doesn't exist? There's plenty of reasons to believe satan is currently active on this planet. There is zero reason to believe these locusts are currently active on the earth. Why is it that the pit can hide them from the outside world while in the pit but that the pit can't hide satan from the outside world while he is in this same pit? By the pit hiding them from the outside world, I'm basically meaning, as if they don't even exist.

What do the locusts symbolize? Are they in a literal pit? Why when they are freed from the pit are they able to torment only those who do not have the seal of God in their foreheads (unbelievers)? And who is the king over them whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon? Can you not see how these locusts are ordained for a certain time in redemptive history?

If you understood the purpose for which Satan is bound you might be able to understand how he can be bound to prevent him from holding the nations of the world in bondage to fear of death, and at the same time free, though bound to this earth, to persecute the woman (Church) and Her seeds (Christians).

 

[rwb]

One reason I moved towards preterist was that I saw enough things being fulfilled in the first century and that these fulfillments could possibly be a foreshadowing of still future events. The more I studied this the more things I saw that maybe didn’t qualify as being a fulfillment of prophecy but could qualify as a foreshadow of a future event.

The big question is how can we tell if something has been fulfilled or not. An example would be Matthew 11:2-6 where John the Baptist questioned whether Jesus was the one or if they should look for another. The answer was to observe what was heard and seen.

Now every view except maybe a full preterist has something that still is going to be fulfilled so the “Bible alone and in its entirety” view seems good, but it doesn’t quite work as even full preterist rely on the historian Josephus.

Since every view must rely on observation of events outside the written word, it seems logical to start with first century history and go forward from there. I’m still currently in this process of examining these things.

I've come to similar belief. IMO the only way to correctly understand the words Christ spoke from the Mt of Olives is to interpret His words as dual prophecy for both the nation of Israel in unbelief as well as prophecy directed to Christ's disciples (Church) of things that shall come as they/we proclaim the Gospel unto all the nations of the world in the power of the Holy Spirit. When Christ says, "then shall be great tribulation such as has never before been, nor shall ever be again", these words came true not only to Israel of Old in unbelief in 70 AD, but is also coming true as the spiritual Kingdom of God is being built as the Gospel is preached with Holy Spirit power. We can't limit "great tribulation" to Jerusalem of Old only, because it's clear the Church on earth has suffered, is suffering, and shall suffer greater tribulation than any other entity ever to have existed on this earth. As did Jerusalem of Old, because the destruction of them meant that as a people chosen by God they shall never rise up again. Dual prophecy for both Jerusalem of Old in unbelief, as well as the Church on earth as the Gospel is preached and the Kingdom of God is built.

 

[rwb]

Roger, one reason why some of us can't get on board with the first advent being what binds satan, is because what the first advent does to satan is permanent and can't be reversed. The thousand years are not permanent. Which would mean that anything the 1st advent did to cause satan to be bound would be reversed when he is loosed.

Some argue, the only thing his binding does is prevent him from deceiving the nations. IOW, it doesn't prevent him from doing other things, it only prevents him from deceiving the nations. But, since his binding is likened to being in prison, if we then compare to the real world, for example, the following. A man that has been driving around drunk is arrested and sentenced to jail time in order to prevent him from driving around drunk. Is that the only thing it prevents him from doing? If he has a job, can he still go to work while in jail? If he has a wife that he sleeps in the same bed with every night, can he do that while he is in jail? Obviously then, this shows that if someone is imprisoned in order to prevent them from doing something in particular that they were doing, this is not the only thing it prevents them from doing while imprisoned, though.

David, why would you say the first advent binding Satan is permanent and can't be reversed? His binding is only to last as long as this time symbolized a thousand years continues. Rev 20 clearly shows us that when this symbolic time has expired Satan will no longer be bound, and will be able to continue to hold the unbelieving nations of the world in bondage to fear of death once again.

I believe the time of Satan's binding coming to an end coincides with the days when the seventh trumpet begins to sound. That's when time given the Church on earth for building the spiritual Kingdom of God shall be no longer. Time will not expire before the spiritual Kingdom of God is complete. Which is why Satan will not be released until time is no more. When time for building the Kingdom of God, and time for Satan's binding comes to an end, the only time left during the day(s) when the seventh trumpet begins to sound is the little season Satan is given to once again hold Gog (antichrists) and Magog (antichristian group) in bondage to fear of death. Once the spiritual Kingdom of God is complete there is no logic in delaying the release of Satan, which will culminate with his destruction by fire along with all of his followers.

 

[Zao is life]

Well, everyone forms their ideas about anything from something or some things... makes decisions ~ hopefully very informed ~ concerning all things. Sure.

I don't mind if it turned out after Jesus returns that I was wrong and you get to see the egg on my face.

Except that it's me who'll get to see the egg on your face

Just kidding. Let's get back to a serious discussion about this. Try to consider carefully why I am saying what I am saying in reply to your points (please). At least it will help you to understand what my thinking is about this and why I cannot be Amil:

Well, the argument cuts both ways... There is no verse that actually says he is unbound ~ the "prowls" of 1 Peter 5:8 is not of the same root word that John uses in Revelation 20 ("bound").

Forget about root words, think about what you said in your very next statement, and the one following it:

Peter certainly portrays Satan as active and able to attempt to deceive individuals,

.. and individuals collectively make up peoples, nations, tribes and tongues.

but this does not require being unbound from deceiving the nations and thereby indirectly contradicting John's vision.

Well I think you know as well as I do that whether or not it contradicts John's vision of the binding of Satan, depends on where in time you place John's vision, so .. no evidence presented there

.. But what comes next is what, IMO, Amils really need to think about:

Satan is certainly active, but his power to deceive has been limited until the period just before the return of Jesus. Satan's ability to keep the nations of earth blinded from seeing who God is and what His gospel means for them is ~ as a result of Christ's finished work in dying on the cross, in rising from the dead, in ascending to the Father, and in being crowned on the throne of glory ~ absolutely unable to ... and therefore bound from... deceiving the the nations, whom he formerly kept blinded to God's saving truth. Satan’s ability to deceive all the nations into rejecting the gospel has been limited. This must be so, because while the world still resists the Word of God, the truth of God has irrefutably enjoyed a much greater worldwide spread since the ascension of Jesus than before. The success of missions and church planting worldwide under the new covenant shows that Satan’s power is being held back.

What (in my opinion) Amils are failing to see (as seen in your statement above) is that what you are implying, is that Satan is at the very least as powerful as the Holy Spirit, and therefore needed to be bound because, failing Satan being bound, "the gospel could not spread the way it has been", and either no one could be saved, OR almost all seed planted by the Spirit of Christ on the heart would have fallen by the wayside.

No. Satan is not nearly as powerful as God, whether he was bound from being able to deceive the nations or not, and God had no need to limit him any more than God had always limited him before Jesus died and rose again. Satan had in any case become a completely, thoroughly defeated foe who had been expelled from the place in heaven where he could accuse the brethren, and cast down to the earth

- and the reason he was expelled from heaven, was because Christ's blood had rendered him totally unable to accuse the brethren before God anymore, and Christ's resurrection had destroyed forever Satan's power over death, and abolished the law in the flesh of Christ (which had been Satan's indictment law-book which he could use against the brethren).

The gospel of God is able to go out into the nations and do what it has done despite Satan's attempts at hindrance. God is so infinitely more powerful than Satan that the only thing that can cause the seed to fall by the wayside is individual choices, despite Satan coming to snatch the seed away. Satan can only snatch the seed away if an individual chooses to block his own ears and his own conscience . The Holy Spirit will not prevent someone from making that choice - and the individual, through his own choice, will have left the seed sown in his heart wide open for Satan to snatch away.

From the days of the words "You will not surely die", the binding of Satan in terms of his ability to deceive the nations has everything to do with RELIGION - the Truth ("I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father but by Me") vs LIES. Satan knows this. He is behind all false religion being used to offer alternatives to the nations. He is a liar and the father of lies.

When he is bound from being able to deceive the nations, it will have everything to do with the fact that there will be only ONE Word in the world - the Word of God. Jesus. One faith.

But in terms of the spread of the gospel -the Kingdom of Christ IN the world since Christ came and died, and rose again, Satan does not need to be bound and did not need to be bound, and asserting that he is bound because it's necessary to stop him from being able to hinder the gospel in the way that you assert above, is implying that he is as powerful as the Holy Spirit, and therefore needed to be bound.
​

On the other hand, though... There is obviously a "however" coming, so I give fair warning... However... ... Jesus actually uses the very same root term (ἔδησεν δέωdeō ~ "binds the strong man" ~ in the irrefutable context in which He has already done it, because He had) in Matthew 12:29 as John does (ἔδησεν δέωdeō ~ "bound him") in Revelation 20:2. So, "no verse or passage" assertion really holds no water... there it is, and straight from Christ's Jesus's mouth. I certainly don't mean to insult anyone's intelligence or intimate that he/she is ignorant in any way, but what Christ Jesus says in Matthew 12:28-29 is what it is.

All that the above is proof of, is that whether before or after Christ died and rose again, He (Christ) is more powerful than Satan - infinitely more powerful - and is able to bind Satan at will - which is exactly what He was doing before His crucifixion.

The word and its root implies nothing about when the day would come that Satan would be completely prevented from deceiving the nations anymore by doing what he always did - offering mankind an alternative to the Word of God, i.e the words of religion that are lies and seek to negate the Word of God.
​

Still, people make up their on minds, and I have no problem with that, and am of the opinion that any issue is unwarranted. To that point, though, regarding insulting anyone's intelligence or intimating ignorance, that's exactly what's coming from... other posters.

Maybe some do, somehow. Maybe. But not me...

I've noticed .. belatedly that you don't believe it should become an issue.

I don't know if my memory is just giving me a guilt trip to be even more sarcastic with me, but I have in the back of my mind that quite a while back I took your playful light sarcasm up in the wrong way (meaning I wrongly thought it was meant to belittle), and reacted badly.

I sincerely apologize if you have any memory in that regard.

My memory could be serving me wrongly though.

So, Satan's destruction in the lake of fire in Revelation 20:10 is... past? Has already happened?

No, no, no. Not what I meant. I was merely trying to make the point that he is defeated, but not yet destroyed in the lake of fire. And what I was implying was "likewise, he is defeated, but not yet bound from being able to deceive the nations" (through religious words that are lies).

Grace and peace to you.

Thank you. And to you.

 

[rwb]

Sure it did. As a preterist ~ or at least leaning that way ~ do you believe Jesus returned in 70 AD? And that there is now no more sin?

No, Christ did not return in 70 AD. He will not return before the spiritual Kingdom of God is complete, and the seventh trumpet sounds that time shall be no longer. Sin has not ended, but the power of sin that held us in fear of the power of death has ended for all who are born again.

 

[grafted branch]

I've come to similar belief. IMO the only way to correctly understand the words Christ spoke from the Mt of Olives is to interpret His words as dual prophecy for both the nation of Israel in unbelief as well as prophecy directed to Christ's disciples (Church) of things that shall come as they/we proclaim the Gospel unto all the nations of the world in the power of the Holy Spirit. When Christ says, "then shall be great tribulation such as has never before been, nor shall ever be again", these words came true not only to Israel of Old in unbelief in 70 AD, but is also coming true as the spiritual Kingdom of God is being built as the Gospel is preached with Holy Spirit power. We can't limit "great tribulation" to Jerusalem of Old only, because it's clear the Church on earth has suffered, is suffering, and shall suffer greater tribulation than any other entity ever to have existed on this earth. As did Jerusalem of Old, because the destruction of them meant that as a people chosen by God they shall never rise up again. Dual prophecy for both Jerusalem of Old in unbelief, as well as the Church on earth as the Gospel is preached and the Kingdom of God is built.

Let me get your opinion on this, some people will argue against the Amil position and say the gospel or Gods word did go to Gentiles before the cross using Nineveh as an example. I know some Amil rather see Nineveh as an exception and foreshadow of the gospel going to the Gentiles.

Here’s my question, do you think the demise of Nineveh foreshadows what will happen to the church more than Jerusalem of old being a foreshadow?

 

[amigo de christo]

If I was ignoring you it wasn't intentional and for sure had nothing to do with bringing up A4E. Sometimes I just get in one of those moods where I just kind of drift away and lose interest in a lot of stuff. Eventually that mood wears off. A lot of times I just don't feel good. I'm dizzy a lot which makes it difficult to concentrate on things. Maybe high blood pressure, maybe high blood sugar, I don't know. I just don't like going to doctors. I don't trust these people these days.

For example, A neighbor a few years back got a covid shot then was told by her doctor that she probably needed another one, meaning soon after this first one. She did what the doctor recommended, and next thing you know, she is getting real bad sick all of a sudden, then she died not long after that. And she wasn't even very old and was never a sickly type person who is sick all the time to begin with. This woman was always smiling, seemed happy all the time, and always waved if I was outside when she was driving by to go to and from her home. Things like that make me leary of doctors in general. Unfortunately then, whatever is wrong with me, I can only speculate since I'm not planning on going to a doctor.

yeah , dont touch that covid shot .

 

[Davidpt]

No, Christ did not return in 70 AD. He will not return before the spiritual Kingdom of God is complete, and the seventh trumpet sounds that time shall be no longer. Sin has not ended, but the power of sin that held us in fear of the power of death has ended for all who are born again.

Every Preterist(meaning Partial not Full Preterists in this case) I have ever discussed/debated these things with, none of them think Christ returned in 70 AD. That is not how they are applying that coming. They are applying that coming as a coming in judgment against unbelieving Jews. But even so, the coming recorded in the Discourse has zero to do with a coming in judgment in 70 AD. Even though a judgment occurred in 70 AD, that is not what the coming of Christ recorded in the OD is involving. Most of us already realize that, Preterists don't. What is mainly tripping them up IMO, is that they are unable or maybe unwilling, to interpret Matthew 24:34 correctly. In their mind this generation can only be meaning those living in the first century when Jesus spoke those words.

Trying to convince a Preterist that they are incorrect about some of these things is like trying to convince Amils they are incorrect about some things. No need to try and convince Premils they are incorrect about things though, since Premils are never incorrect about things. Just kidding of course. Of course Premils are wrong about some things just like any other position is wrong about some things.

 

[rwb]

Actually it's the Amils who don't understand what "deceive the nations" means. But go on ..

Yes, I agree, which is why I am not the typical Amil. I'm not so married to any doctrine that I cannot change when through my study of Scripture I've come to understand some things differently than I once did.

If it were true what you are saying above, then everyone would be a believer (because Satan is bound, so no seed can fall by the wayside).

You're forgetting there are only some who are ordained to eternal who shall believe. Those who remain in bondage to fear of death are whosoever has not been ordained to eternal life. Those Gentiles who would believe the Gospel had to hear the Gospel before they could believe and be freed from bondage to fear of death.

Romans 10:14-15 (KJV) How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

Acts 13:48 (KJV) And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Satan can still snatch away the Word sown in the hearts of individuals, It's never been any different:

I agree! Whosoever is NOT ordained to eternal life will not be changed by hearing the Gospel. In that sense the Word sown indeed is snatched away less they should believe.

Luke 8:12 (KJV) Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.

The only one arguing that Satan is more powerful than God is you!

 

[rwb]

Let me get your opinion on this, some people will argue against the Amil position and say the gospel or Gods word did go to Gentiles before the cross using Nineveh as an example. I know some Amil rather see Nineveh as an exception and foreshadow of the gospel going to the Gentiles.

Here’s my question, do you think the demise of Nineveh foreshadows what will happen to the church more than Jerusalem of old being a foreshadow?

Eternal life through the Messiah who was to come was not limited to Jews only. Some Gentiles were eternally saved before the advent of Christ. The problem was to be saved of Old Gentiles had to convert to Judaism and obey the laws and commandments of God. Since Israel hoarded the oracles of God, that God gave only to Israel, the Gentiles that did not become as a Jew had no knowledge of the promised Messiah.

I believe that we believers are the body of Christ, the Church as she is in this world. The demise of Nineveh was ordained by God. Yes, there was a short reprieve when the nation repented through hearing Jonah preach and believed him. If they had been ordained to eternal life they would not have been destroyed when they again forsake God. And yes, I do believe there are many examples or foreshadowing of events of Old that are written to be an example for the Church. Even though the Bible indicates there will still be faithful saints alive on the earth when Christ returns, I'm reminded of the rhetorical question Christ's asked

Luke 18:8 (KJV) I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

Showing Nineveh as what will happen to the Church is good, because Nineveh appeared to repent at the preaching of Jonah. But in the end we find their repentance was not unto the saving of their soul, and sadly I believe there are many within the body of believers who mentally repent and turn to Christ for eternal life, who in the end will be many standing in the judgement to hear Christ say:

Matthew 7:23 (KJV) And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

 

[rwb]

Every Preterist(meaning Partial not Full Preterists in this case) I have ever discussed/debated these things with, none of them think Christ returned in 70 AD. That is not how they are applying that coming. They are applying that coming as a coming in judgment against unbelieving Jews. But even so, the coming recorded in the Discourse has zero to do with a coming in judgment in 70 AD. Even though a judgment occurred in 70 AD, that is not what the coming of Christ recorded in the OD is involving. Most of us already realize that, Preterists don't. What is mainly tripping them up IMO, is that they are unable or maybe unwilling, to interpret Matthew 24:34 correctly. In their mind this generation can only be meaning those living in the first century when Jesus spoke those words.

Trying to convince a Preterist that they are incorrect about some of these things is like trying to convince Amils they are incorrect about some things. No need to try and convince Premils they are incorrect about things though, since Premils are never incorrect about things. Just kidding of course. Of course Premils are wrong about some things just like any other position is wrong about some things.

I really don't understand the mind that believes Christ came in 70 AD to judge Israel of Old. They use the writings found in the prophets of old and say see how they speak as the LORD coming in clouds etc. and His wrath was poured out on them. Where in those writings do the prophets speak of Jesus coming again when God's wrath was poured out? What happened in 70 AD was the wrath of God, He had promised would come was poured out upon them one last time, only this time His wrath would make a complete end of them ever being the chosen people of God again. The only Jews eternally saved from Israel of Old is the remnant according to election of grace.

I agree, the outpouring of God's wrath on a disobedient people who had become abominable to God poured out on them in 70 AD has no connection with Christ coming again in the end of days. Great tribulation of God was indeed poured upon Israel back then, but that was only a small sampling of the great tribulation that would come against Christ and His Church as the Gospel is sent unto all the world. Not even 70 AD is greater than tribulation the Church on earth has sustained in this world and yet She continues to be alive and is even still growing.

 

[Timtofly]

This is the most bizarre understanding of scripture I have ever heard. I don't know where you're getting this stuff from.

I was just pointing out your own conclusions as you described them.

 

[Zao is life]

Christians were scattered abroad preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of God long before 70 AD. This was after the first advent of Christ. Saul, who became the Apostle to the Gentiles caused many of them to spread into other nations. It was the cross of Christ that caused persecution and physical death that caused the Gospel to be dispersed unto all the nations of the world (Gentiles). While it's true there were Christians warned to flee from Jerusalem, according to historical records, it was not the destruction of Jerusalem that caused the spread of the Gospel to go into the all the world. The Gospel of Christ could not be sent unto all the nations of the world until Christ literally made atonement for sin, and defeated death. We read of the early Church after the advent of Christ and clearly see His prophetic words beginning to be fulfilled.

Acts 8:1-3 (KJV) And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles. And devout men carried Stephen to his burial, and made great lamentation over him. As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison.

You're not understanding the purpose for Satan's binding. Before he was bound Satan held the nations of the world in bondage to fear of death. All mankind in unbelief is still being held in bondage to that fear. That was true for unbelievers both before and after the advent of Christ. It was by Christ defeating death, and through the eyewitness testimony of Christ's disciples and preaching the Gospel that the bondage to fear of dying has been broken. Christ proved that He was of greater power than Satan because death could not hold Him, nor can it hold whosoever is born again through Him.

There was no Gospel of Christ to proclaim to the nations of the world before the first advent of Christ coming to earth a man.

There was a gospel of the coming seed of Abraham though. The three kings worshiped Him when He was born, because they had knowledge of the gospel. It was first preached to Abraham, and Abraham believed and it was credited to him for righteousness.

Through his seed, Joseph and Ephraim (the house of Israel), he had become the father of many Gentile nations even long before Christ was born.​

 

[Zao is life]

Yes, I agree, which is why I am not the typical Amil. I'm not so married to any doctrine that I cannot change when through my study of Scripture I've come to understand some things differently than I once did.

The only one arguing that Satan is more powerful than God is you!

No I'm not. But you are indeed implying that Satan is at the very least as powerful as God by stating that he needed to be bound or limited in terms of his ability to deceive the nations, so that the gospel of the Kingdom could be spread to the nations.

The Holy Spirit is infinitely more powerful than Satan. God had no need to bind or limit Satan any more than he always was limited by God in order that the gospel of the Kingdom could be spread among the nations.​