Can any of you link or share a good argument against FULL preterism?

[JLB]

Wouldn’t this mean that the earthly Jerusalem does see destruction when the first heaven and first earth pass away?

I believe there will be a cleansing of the earth and Jerusalem where even the temple is removed, so that everything will be pure, and God the Father will be among us, and we will see His face.

 

[claninja]

It's the truth, dramatic or not.

No, just dramatics. I don’t have disdain for you just because we disagree about eschatology.

LOL. Sure, you do. If the peers have no reverence for the word of God, why do you trust them?

Ok, so your life doesn’t rely on any science that was not peer reviewed by a Christian with your specific theological outlook?

You have proven time and time again that you do not understand "proper hermeneutics, such as grammar, syntax, context, historical setting, audience relevance" nearly as well as you think you do. Your interpretation of the parable of the minas is a good example of this. The way you just dismiss the fact that saved people are shown to be rewarded at the same time Christ's enemies are punished reveals how much doctrinal bias influences your interpretations.

Nice strawman. I Never disagreed that the enemies are punished at the same time as rewards dolled out.

I think it's important for you to recognize that they were inspired by the Holy Spirit who obviously knows the truth about all of these things. You act as if they just wrote entirely using their own intellect and own observations of the world without the aid of the Holy Spirit.

The Bible includes detailed elements of ancient near eastern cosmology - firmament, pillars of the earth, waters below and above, circle of the earth, etc….consistent with the surrounding culture’s ANE cosmology during that historical time period.

This is complete nonsense. You are basically saying that the flood in the Bible should be understood from the Ancient Near Eastern perspective of that time. Are you kidding me?

Yes…..the story of the biblical flood, as written by those in the ancient near east….should be understood from the perspective of the ancient near east. Historical context and audience relevance are important tools for proper hermeneutics, but probably not for fundamentalists.

Says who? People who don't believe the Bible. You believe secular anti-Bible scientists to tell you what to believe instead of the Bible. It's just sad.

The majority of Christian geologists do not agree with a global flood.

Nonsense! The Bible is not written from a flawed "Ancient Near Eastern cosmological perspective", it is written from God's perspective because He inspired it

The Bible was written by flawed human beings. That doesn’t mean the truths and lessons are not inspired and profitable for teaching.

I’m not really sure how a flood according to ANE cosmology impacts anything theologically, unless of course if you are a fundamentalist

 

[grafted branch]

I believe there will be a cleansing of the earth and Jerusalem where even the temple is removed, so that everything will be pure, and God the Father will be among us, and we will see His face.

It appears you have the current earth and heavens lasting forever, but in a cleansed or transformed into a perfect physical state in the future.
Would you agree that a spiritual perfect state happened at the cross and that is depicted as the heavenly Jerusalem in verses such as Hebrews 12:22 and Galatians 4:26?

 

[claninja]

Those are talking about OT scriptures that specifically refer to the Messiah (Jesus, obviously), not all OT scriptures. Why do you act as if those are talking about literally all OT scriptures when Jesus Himself referred to "everything written about me"? He didn't say "everything written". Surely, not all OT prophecies are fulfilled. For example, the dead have not yet been resurrected, but that is written about in the OT. The new heavens and new earth have not yet been ushered in, but that is written about in the OT.

I posted more than just Luke 24:44. Acts 3:24 states the OT scriptures spoke of the days of the apostles. Luke 21:22 spoke of the destruction of Jerusalem fulfilling all that is written.

What NT passages state the OT passages would be fulfilled beyond the first century?

 

[claninja]

Behold, the day of the LORD is coming,
And your spoil will be divided in your midst.
For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem;
The city shall be taken,
The houses rifled,
And the women ravished.
Half of the city shall go into captivity,
But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
Then the LORD will go forth
And fight against those nations,
As He fights in the day of battle.
And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives,
Which faces Jerusalem on the east.
And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two,
From east to west,
Making a very large valley;
Half of the mountain shall move toward the north
And half of it toward the south.
Then you shall flee through My mountain valley,
For the mountain valley shall reach to Azal.
Yes, you shall flee
As you fled from the earthquake
In the days of Uzziah king of Judah.
Thus the LORD my God will come,
And all the saints with You.
Zechariah 14:1-5



Did the Lord fight against the Roman soldiers who destroyed the temple and the city in 70 AD?

Already answered. IF Zechariah 14 is not about the immediate historical context of when Zechariah lived, but is instead an eschatological prophecy, then i would argue its fulfillment falls into Luke 24:44 (Jesus life, death, resurrection), acts 3:24 (the days of the apostles), OR Luke 22:22 (destruction of Jerusalem).

UNLESS of course you can provide a NT passage the specifically states the OT prophets find their fulfillment beyond the first century

 

[JLB]

It appears you have the current earth and heavens lasting forever,

‘where did I say the current heavens and earth are lasting forever?

 

[grafted branch]

‘where did I say the current heavens and earth are lasting forever?

Well if their not then how can Zechariah 14:11 be true before the current earth is destroyed?

Zechariah 14:11 And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Ok, so your life doesn’t rely on any science that was not peer reviewed by a Christian with your specific theological outlook?

I don't know what you're asking here. Can you try again?

Nice strawman. I Never disagreed that the enemies are punished at the same time as rewards dolled out.

If you didn't, then you at least never addressed your understanding of that from what I can recall. What rewards do you think were doled out in 70 AD?

The Bible includes detailed elements of ancient near eastern cosmology - firmament, pillars of the earth, waters below and above, circle of the earth, etc….consistent with the surrounding culture’s ANE cosmology during that historical time period.

What is your point? You are suggesting that the biblical authors relied on ANE cosmology and not on the Holy Spirit who inspired them for understanding?

Yes…..the story of the biblical flood, as written by those in the ancient near east….should be understood from the perspective of the ancient near east. Historical context and audience relevance are important tools for proper hermeneutics, but probably not for fundamentalists.

No, we should accept what the biblical text states and it clearly states that the flood was global. I don't care what you say about this ancient near east stuff. You can't get around that.

Genesis 6:13 And God said to Noah, “The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

Is there some other planet earth than the one we live on that you think God was talking about here? He made it quite clear that He was not only going to destroy "all flesh" on the earth, but the earth itself as well. There's no indication that anyone but Noah and his family and any part of the earth would be spared. No amount of twisting the text with your ancient near east gibberish can change that.

The majority of Christian geologists do not agree with a global flood.

I couldn't care less about that. The majority isn't always right, as you know. Otherwise, you wouldn't be a preterist since that is not the majority eschatological view.

The Bible was written by flawed human beings. That doesn’t mean the truths and lessons are not inspired and profitable for teaching.

What is your point here exactly? Are you suggesting that any part of the Bible is inaccurate or not truthful?

I’m not really sure how a flood according to ANE cosmology impacts anything theologically, unless of course of your a fundamentalist

I don't know what you mean here. It's like we don't even speak the same language sometimes. What exactly is your point here? I didn't mention anything about its impact theologically.

 

[JLB]

Already answered.

‘No you didn’t answer my question.

You may have answered your own question but you certainly didn’t answer my question.


My Question:

Did the Lord fight against the Roman soldiers who destroyed the temple and the city in 70 AD?

Yes
No

We see the Lord fights against these nations who came against Jerusalem?

So please answer my question.


Here I will give you my answer so you can see what it means to answer this question.


No, the Lord did not fight against the Romans in 70 AD. The Romans destroyed the city and the temple and went back to Rome as conquering hero’s.


Here is this prophecy where the nations are coming against the city of Jerusalem on the Day of the Lord, the Lord Himself will fight against those nations and His feet will stand on the mount of Olives.

There’s my answer.


So now I await your answer.


Behold, the day of the LORD is coming,
And your spoil will be divided in your midst.
For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem;
The city shall be taken,
The houses rifled,
And the women ravished.
Half of the city shall go into captivity,
But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
Then the LORD will go forth
And fight against those nations,
As He fights in the day of battle.
And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives,
Which faces Jerusalem on the east.
And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two,
From east to west,
Making a very large valley;
Half of the mountain shall move toward the north
And half of it toward the south.
Then you shall flee through My mountain valley,
For the mountain valley shall reach to Azal.
Yes, you shall flee
As you fled from the earthquake
In the days of Uzziah king of Judah.
Thus the LORD my God will come,
And all the saints with You.
Zechariah 14:1-5

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I posted more than just Luke 24:44. Acts 3:24 states the OT scriptures spoke of the days of the apostles. Luke 21:22 spoke of the destruction of Jerusalem fulfilling all that is written.

Does context mean nothing to you? Those scriptures do not say that literally all OT scriptures were fulfilled or would be fulfilled as of 70 AD. Luke 21:22 relates specifically to the OT scriptures that were related to the events of 70 AD, not literally all OT scriptures. Good grief. Please ask God for wisdom so that you can begin to understand context in scripture (James 1:5-7).

What NT passages state the OT passages would be fulfilled beyond the first century?

Which OT passages? Obviously, the NT passages that quote the fulfillment of OT passages or the near fulfillment wouldn't apply, but the NT doesn't quote literally all OT passages. The bodily resurrection of the dead has clearly not yet happened, for example. There are OT passages which refer to that. They are not fulfilled. Why do you make simple things so complicated?

 

[claninja]

I don't know what you're asking here. Can you try again?


If you didn't, then you at least never addressed your understanding of that from what I can recall. What rewards do you think were doled out in 70 AD?


What is your point? You are suggesting that the biblical authors relied on ANE cosmology and not on the Holy Spirit who inspired them for understanding?


No, we should accept what the biblical text states and it clearly states that the flood was global. I don't care what you say about this ancient near east stuff. You can't get around that.

Genesis 6:13 And God said to Noah, “The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

Is there some other planet earth than the one we live on that you think God was talking about here? He made it quite clear that He was not only going to destroy "all flesh" on the earth, but the earth itself as well. There's no indication that anyone but Noah and his family and any part of the earth would be spared. No amount of twisting the text with your ancient near east gibberish can change that.


I couldn't care less about that. The majority isn't always right, as you know. Otherwise, you wouldn't be a preterist since that is not the majority eschatological view.


What is your point here exactly? Are you suggesting that any part of the Bible is inaccurate or not truthful?


I don't know what you mean here. It's like we don't even speak the same language sometimes. What exactly is your point here? I didn't mention anything about its impact theologically.

the main point is that it’s completely hypocritical to argue that there was a global flood because you believe the Bible says so, despite a lack of any real extra biblical evidence that a global flood actually occurred. ALL WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, demanding that a preterist, who believes the Bible says Christ would come on the clouds in the first century, should be able to provide extra biblical evidence that Christ came on the clouds in the first century.

Additionally, it’s completely arbitrary to say secular science goes against the global flood because it “hates God”, when the majority of Christian geologists agree there was no global flood.

Also, to your non related question: redemption and kingdom of heaven.

Lastly, why does the Bible use ANE cosmological concepts (firmament, pillars of the earth, the abyss, waters below and above, etc……) consistent with the surrounding historical setting and cultural context of those time periods?

 

[claninja]

‘No you didn’t answer my question.

You may have answered your own question but you certainly didn’t answer my question.


My Question:

Did the Lord fight against the Roman soldiers who destroyed the temple and the city in 70 AD?

Yes
No

We see the Lord fights against these nations who came against Jerusalem?

So please answer my question.


Here I will give you my answer so you can see what it means to answer this question.


No, the Lord did not fight against the Romans in 70 AD. The Romans destroyed the city and the temple and went back to Rome as conquering hero’s.


Here is this prophecy where the nations are coming against the city of Jerusalem on the Day of the Lord, the Lord Himself will fight against those nations and His feet will stand on the mount of Olives.

There’s my answer.


So now I await your answer.


Behold, the day of the LORD is coming,
And your spoil will be divided in your midst.
For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem;
The city shall be taken,
The houses rifled,
And the women ravished.
Half of the city shall go into captivity,
But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
Then the LORD will go forth
And fight against those nations,
As He fights in the day of battle.
And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives,
Which faces Jerusalem on the east.
And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two,
From east to west,
Making a very large valley;
Half of the mountain shall move toward the north
And half of it toward the south.
Then you shall flee through My mountain valley,
For the mountain valley shall reach to Azal.
Yes, you shall flee
As you fled from the earthquake
In the days of Uzziah king of Judah.
Thus the LORD my God will come,
And all the saints with You.
Zechariah 14:1-5

This is a “loaded question” if you are implying it is related to Zechariah 14:1-5.

I wouldn’t say Zechariah 14:1-5 is an eschatological prophecy related to “God fighting against the Romans who destroyed the temple in 70ad”. So I don’t agree with the question you are asking as it relates to Zechariah 14:1-5.

IF Zechariah 14 is NOT a prophecy about Zechariah’s immediate historical context, BUT is an eschatological prophecy, we should look for any NT quotations for Zechariah 14’s fulfillment. Unfortunately, there are zero NT quotes that explicitly state any part of Zechariah 14 is fulfilled. While we have allusions to Zechariah 14’s living waters in John 7 and revelation 22, neither passage explicitly states that this is the fulfillment of Zechariah 14.

HOWEVER, we do have several NT passages that claim 1.) Christ fulfilled everything in the law of Moses, psalms, and prophets about Him (Luke 24:44), 2.) the prophets spoke about the days of the apostles (acts 3:24) - which would include the allusion to living waters according to John 7, 3.) and the destruction of Jerusalem fulfills all that is written (Luke 21:22).

So to answer your question for the 3rd time, my best guess is that Zechariah 14 finds its fulfillment in either 1, 2, or 3 but I can’t say which one for certain because the NT doesn’t…….…UNLESS of course you can provide a NT passage that clearly and explicitly mentions the OT prophets having fulfillment beyond the first century or beyond Jesus’ generation. If you could then we could confidently say Zechariah 14 could potentially find its fulfillment in the future still.

 

[claninja]

Does context mean nothing to you? Those scriptures do not say that literally all OT scriptures were fulfilled or would be fulfilled as of 70 AD. Luke 21:22 relates specifically to the OT scriptures that were related to the events of 70 AD, not literally all OT scriptures. Good grief. Please ask God for wisdom so that you can begin to understand context in scripture (James 1:5-7).


Which OT passages? Obviously, the NT passages that quote the fulfillment of OT passages or the near fulfillment wouldn't apply, but the NT doesn't quote literally all OT passages. The bodily resurrection of the dead has clearly not yet happened, for example. There are OT passages which refer to that. They are not fulfilled. Why do you make simple things so complicated?

Good grief……..The question by JBL i responded to was specifically about Zechariah 14:1-5, no?

I gave the context that Luke 24:44 is about scriptures speaking of the life, death, resurrection of Christ. I gave the context that acts 3:24 is about the prophets speaking of the apostles’ days. I gave the context that Luke 21:22 is about the destruction of Jerusalem fulfilling all that is written. I stated i believe Zechariah 14 is probably related to one (or could be all 3) of these. If not, what NT passages demonstrate an explicit belief that the OT prophets would be fulfilled beyond the first century?

What context am I missing with the above passages in regards to Zechariah 14?

 

[HealthyShape]

Did the Lord fight against the Roman soldiers who destroyed the temple and the city in 70 AD?
Yes or No?

Already answered. I said "no" in the first reaction. Post #578. It seems you are not interested in reading my posts carefully.

No ambiguity, no twisting and diluting God’s word will make it somehow go away.

You insisted on the same question, so I explained more and gave you some options how to read Zech. Many OT texts are ambiguous. Because of the Hebrew language, because of the textual versions, because of the translation options and because of the nature of the prophetical language.

No man can tell you 100% how exactly this or that verse happened and the exact date. The same applies to the book of Revelation, for example.

 

[JLB]

Already answered. I said "no" in the first reaction. Post #578. It seems you are not interested in reading my posts carefully.

Then we are in agreement that the Prophecy in Zechariah concerning The Day of the LORD remains unfulfilled.


Thank you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

the main point is that it’s completely hypocritical to argue that there was a global flood because you believe the Bible says so, despite a lack of any real extra biblical evidence that a global flood actually occurred.

When did I say there was no "real extra biblical evidence that a global flood actually occurred"? I believe there is. And I already said that before as well. So, I disagree with you about that. Not sure why you would assume I would agree with that.

ALL WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, demanding that a preterist, who believes the Bible says Christ would come on the clouds in the first century, should be able to provide extra biblical evidence that Christ came on the clouds in the first century.

That is different since I believe there is extra biblical evidence for a global flood, but I'm not aware of any evidence being offered for Jesus coming visibly and bodily in the first century. Keep in mind here that this is a thread about FULL preterism. So, I'm saying there is no evidence to back up what full preterists (at least some of them) believe about Jesus having come visibly and bodily in 70 AD.

Additionally, it’s completely arbitrary to say secular science goes against the global flood because it “hates God”, when the majority of Christian geologists agree there was no global flood.

LOL. Where do you get your info from? Have you done studies or surveys of all Christian geologists?

Also, to your non related question: redemption and kingdom of heaven.

Which question was that?

Lastly, why does the Bible use ANE cosmological concepts (firmament, pillars of the earth, the abyss, waters below and above, etc……) consistent with the surrounding historical setting and cultural context of those time periods?

No idea what your point is here. Do you think none of those references are literal? We're talking about whether the Bible says there was a global flood or not and it clearly does. Why are you trying to once again make something simple into something convoluted? I feel sorry for you and the other preterists who are deluded by false preterist teachings.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Good grief……..The question by JBL i responded to was specifically about Zechariah 14:1-5, no?

I gave the context that Luke 24:44 is about scriptures speaking of the life, death, resurrection of Christ. I gave the context that acts 3:24 is about the prophets speaking of the apostles’ days. I gave the context that Luke 21:22 is about the destruction of Jerusalem fulfilling all that is written. I stated i believe Zechariah 14 is probably related to one (or could be all 3) of these. If not, what NT passages demonstrate an explicit belief that the OT prophets would be fulfilled beyond the first century?

What context am I missing with the above passages in regards to Zechariah 14?

Good grief yourself. What do you not understand about what I said? You are the one making blanket statements that all OT scriptures are fulfilled while using verses to support that which only refer to certain OT scriptures and not all of them. Do you or do you not believe that all OT prophecies are fulfilled?

 

[HealthyShape]

Then we are in agreement that the Prophecy in Zechariah concerning The Day of the LORD remains unfulfilled.

Again, you do not care to read my posts properly. I did not say it is unfulfilled. Read the post #587 again and see the three options I offered.

 

[JLB]

Again, you do not care to read my posts properly. I did not say it is unfulfilled. Read the post #587 again and see the three options I offered.

Again, you do not care to read my posts properly. I did not say it is unfulfilled. Read the post #587 again and see the three options I offered.

Again, we agree that there are things yet to be fulfilled.


Mainly the coming of the Lord and the resurrection of the dead in Christ.

 

[claninja]

When did I say there was no "real extra biblical evidence that a global flood actually occurred"? I believe there is. And I already said that before as well. So, I disagree with you about that. Not sure why you would assume I would agree with that.

I never said, that you said, there was no real extra biblical evidence for a global flood.

I understand you personally believe there is extra biblical evidence of a global flood, despite the broader scientific community disagreeing pretty unanimously.

That is different since I believe there is extra biblical evidence for a global flood, but I'm not aware of any evidence being offered for Jesus coming visibly and bodily in the first century. Keep in mind here that this is a thread about FULL preterism. So, I'm saying there is no evidence to back up what full preterists (at least some of them) believe about Jesus having come visibly and bodily in 70 AD.

I’m not aware of any mainline preterist belief that Jesus came literally and visibly in the first century? So, I guess it would also seem arbitrary to ask a preterist for extra biblical evidence that Jesus came literally and visibly in the first century, when they don’t believe that happened.

But for arguments sake, Let's say a fringe full preterist believes Jesus did come literally and visibly in the first century near the destruction of Jerusalem. This preterist cites Josephus and Tacitus as extra biblical evidence to support their belief that the "bible says Jesus would return in the first century, literally and visibly" - A sword shaped star, and armies in the sky above Jerusalem during the destruction of jerusalem.

I'm assuming you would disagree that this is serious, extra biblical evidence that Jesus returned literally and visibly in the first century? And so similarly, there are those who would disagree with your evidence of a global flood, especially since the scientific consensus disagrees with a global flood occurred.

Again, its arbitrary for someone to argue that there was "a global flood" because they think "the bible says so", while being unable to provide any serious, peer reviewed extra biblical evidence of a global flood, all while at the same time, demanding a fringe full preterist, that believes "Jesus returned literally and visibly in the first century" because they think "the Bible says so", provide serious, extra biblical evidence of jesus returning literally and visibly.

LOL. Where do you get your info from? Have you done studies or surveys of all Christian geologists?

The ASA and ACG are two of the largest professional Christian geologist affiliations, and most of their members hold that Noah’s Flood was likely a regional event based on the geological evidence.

Which question was that?

Rewards, I think?

No idea what your point is here. Do you think none of those references are literal? We're talking about whether the Bible says there was a global flood or not and it clearly does. Why are you trying to once again make something simple into something convoluted? I feel sorry for you and the other preterists who are deluded by false preterist teachings.

The point is, if the authors of the Bible didn’t believe in a cosmology consistent with the ANE, then why does the Bible use language to describe the world consistent with ANE cosmology - firmament, circle of the earth, pillars of the earth, waters below, waters above, the abyss, etc…..? What’s your explanation for these ANE cosmological terms being found throughout scripture.

I guess, I should probably ask, since you believe in a literal global flood, do you believe there is a literal firmament in the sky? Do you believe the earth is held up by literal pillars? Do you believe there is a literal abyss underneath the earth? Do you believe the earth is a flat disc with rounded dome structure on top of it, where God's throne is literally located on the other side?