Let's exegete Hebrews 10:37 in context

[rebuilder 454]

Everybody is a "heretic" to someone else. The over-use of this term being thrown around at random negates its meaning. Kind of reminds me of the Inquisition.

This is over the top ridiculous.

SMH

THAT MEANS THERE IS NO TRUTH AT ALL.
JUST SOMEONE'S PERCEPTION OF IT.

 

[Davy]

Everybody is a "heretic" to someone else. The over-use of this term being thrown around at random negates its meaning. Kind of reminds me of the Inquisition.

You definitely wouldn't have made it through the Spanish Inquisition with your following that non-Biblical false theory that Christ's 2nd coming already happened back in history. Not long now, and those like yourself will be exposed by Christ.

 

[3 Resurrections]

You going to tell me Jesus already returned, and that the flying scorpions came and went? There's no place in history recording that event.
The mark of the beef came and went and there's no place that recorded that event.?The hail stones of fire came and went and nobody recorded that event?
The rapture of the church already happened and it's not recorded anywhere?
You gonna tell me the Jesus lied When he said he was preparing a place for us in heaven?

In case this was addressed to me...

Yes, Christ Jesus already bodily returned in AD 70, and was eye-witnessed at that bodily return to the Mount of Olives by "those that pierced Him" - the tribes of Israel who were besieged within the city of Jerusalem in AD 70.

Yes, the so-called "locusts" with tails like scorpions came and went during that five-month term of "torment" during which the Roman soldiers under Gessius Florus the governor deliberately plagued the inhabitants of Israel in order to make them revolt against Rome. The description of the "locusts" with their "hair like women" and "crowns like gold" was a spot-on description of the Roman Gallic G helmets worn during that AD 60's period, of which we have archived examples today , retrieved from the Colchester rubbish pits in England from the Roman AD 60 war with Queen Boudicca. These Roman soldiers had a field ballistic weapon that was actually called a "scorpion", with the tension spring mechanism that operated it called a "tormenta". All of that five month period in Revelation 9 was history since early AD 66, which torment of Judea's citizens forced the Jews into a rebellion against Rome that summer in AD 66.

The "mark" of the Sea Beast was required by the "land Beast" - the Judaic religious leadership - and was the abominable-to-God Tyrian shekel required as the only coin allowed for sales and purchases by anybody coming to worship at the temple. This "mark" lasted from 19 BC until AD 66, when the Zealot rebellion against Rome stopped its practice.

The "hailstones" in Rev. 16:21 were the one talent weight of catapult stones which the Romans as well as the competing Zealot leaders used against their enemies. Examples of those stones have been retrieved from Jerusalem by archaeologists.

The "rapture" was going to include ONLY the bodily-resurrected saints taken to heaven at Christ's return. NO LIVING believers who hadn't yet physically died were ever promised a translation-type change of the body before being taken to heaven. Those who were "alive" but who had "remained" on the earth were those saints who had already been made alive by the resurrection process - like Lazarus, Dorcas, the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints, etc. All of those resurrected ones were the ones who participated in the AD70 "rapture" at that time. The exact day of this AD 70 bodily return of Christ was predicted by Daniel 12:11-13. History tells us when those two events took place in the same season, (which was in AD 66), and the 1,335-day countdown from those events in AD 66 to the resurrection ended on AD 70's Pentecost day in Jerusalem.

 

[3 Resurrections]

You definitely wouldn't have made it through the Spanish Inquisition with your following that non-Biblical false theory that Christ's 2nd coming already happened back in history. Not long now, and those like yourself will be exposed by Christ.

If I had lived back then, the truth would have been worth dying for. It still is.

You still haven't answered my question: Why are you so irate that Christ promised His own first-century generation that He would return while some of them were still alive? The fulfillment of this Matthew 16:27-28 promise back in AD 70 does not remove your own proper expectations for a future bodily resurrection and rewards given to you at a judgment in our future. You aren't going to lose a single thing that you hope for. So why are you so angry?

 

[Davy]

If I had lived back then, the truth would have been worth dying for. It still is.

I'm sure Lord Jesus will oblige you, if that's what you really want. Yet like Peter said in 2 Peter 3:9, it's God's Will that none should perish, but that all should come to Repentance. And boy, do you need repentance badly because of following a doctrine of the devil with falsely claiming Jesus' 2nd coming already happened back in history.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The pillars are non negotiable.

Of course. Hebrews 6:1-2 gave us six of those non-negotiable foundational pillars as some of the "milk" doctrines that our faith begins with: namely, "repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment."'

Because of the Full Preterist error in refuting a bodily resurrection for the saints, I have spent the last 13 years of my Scripture research reconciling all the Scripture references that speak of (#1), an AD 70 bodily return of Christ in that first-century generation, as well as (#2), the hope of the "redemption of our bodies" in the resurrection, as you and I can also expect to be changed into the incorruptible and immortal condition in our future. These two Scripture realities CAN be reconciled with each other, without compromising the truth of either one.

And boy, do you need repentance badly because of following a doctrine of the devil with falsely claiming Jesus' 2nd coming already happened back in history.

Then you would likewise accuse Christ of having a "doctrine of the devil" in Matthew 16:27-28 when He promised He would return with angels to give rewards to all according to their works, and while some of those He was then speaking to were still alive to see it happen. That was the AD 70 bodily return of Christ, as He promised.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Hebrews 10:37 "In a very, very little while He who is coming will come and will not delay."

For many years, I have asked fellow Christians to deal with this verse. I do not recall having received a response from anyone.

The writer of Hebrews wrote this shortly before A. D. 70 (ca 64-69). The destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple was then only a few years away. This is why the writer admonished those believers of his day to not forsake the necessary practice of assembling together. They needed to be "awake" and "ready" for that day. In their own time, they were seeing the "day" approach. This is the day of the Lord's coming in judgment against that apostate nation of Jews which Jesus judged guilty of "all the righteous blood shed on the earth" (Mat. 23). The time was fast approaching when their "house" (the Temple) was about to be destroyed by the Roman armies.

That day was not to be delayed. It was to happen in their lifetime--"in a very, very little while." Yet some still wait for His return--a delay of thousands of years is not "a very, very little while." "Hope deferred makes the heart sick" (Prob. 13:12).

You failed to look at the context of the verse. That verse partly refers to Isaiah 26:20 and when looking at that verse you can see that the little while relates to the amount of time that Christ's wrath will occur when He comes. Hebrews 10:37 has nothing to do with how long it would be until Christ came. When He comes in the future, He will not delay and will come quickly as lightning flashes from the east to the west (Matt 24:27) and His wrath will come down for a little while.

Isaiah 26:20 Go, my people, enter your rooms and shut the doors behind you; hide yourselves for a little while until his wrath has passed by.

Jesus did not come in 70 AD. Nothing you do can change that. Preterism is a false doctrine that can't be taken seriously.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

But many, many members of the Church will never come to the truths of the Word of God until they follow the words of the Apostle Paul and become "workers not needing to be ashamed, RIGHTLY DIVIDING the Word of Truth" (2 Tim. 2:15). There is absolutely NO reasaon for anyone who claims to be a student of God's Word to NOT understand the simple meaning of the following verses

1. "THIS generation will by no means pass away until ALL THESE THINGS take place" (Mat. 24:34).

Jesus used that expression NINETEEN times. He ALWAYS meant His contemporaries. All of those things were to happen to THOSE disciples in THEIR lifetime. Many Christians cannot and will not see that because they have been infected by the egregious, inexcusable false teachings of dispensationalism invented by John Nelson Darby and facilitated by C. I. Scofield and his horrendous study Bible.

2. "In a VERY, VERY LITTLE WHILE He who IS COMING will COME and will NOT delay" (Heb. 10:37). That was NOT written to us. It was written to those of the writer's own day. He was coming to THEM in "a very, very little while." It is clear.

You need to stop this foolishness. Your preterist beliefs are every bit as off base as dispensationalism, so you have no room to talk. Matthew 24:34 relates to the second coming of Christ which has not yet occurred. He was talking about this same generation He referred to in verse 33 that would see things that would indicate that His coming was near and He has not yet come. There was no coming of Christ in 70 AD. There was no resurrection of the dead in 70 AD. There was no gathering of the elect in 70 AD. You are forced to change the text of many passages of scripture to accommodate your false preterist beliefs. When He comes, the heavens and the earth will be burned up (2 Peter 3:10-12)? Did that happen in 70 AD? Of course not. But, since you are married to that belief system, you will do ANYTHING to twist scripture to support it.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

This kind of skirting around the CLEAR context of Hebrews 10:37 (which I meticulously outlined in my post to Exegesis) is, sadly, exactly what I expected. Have you read the Book of Hebrews? It is ALL ABOUT CHRIST, the HIGH PRIEST of the BETTER COVENANT that was to come and predicted by Jeremiah (Jer. 31:31-34).

There is no limit to the twisting and obfuscating and manipulating futurists will do to GOD'S OWN WORD in order to attempt to uphold their false paradigm.

The entire subject of the Book of Hebrews is CHRIST and His work of salvation as the High Priest of the Better Covenant--the covenant in His blood. Christ and He alone permeates the pages of that awesome, Christ-affirming, Christ-honoring book. And you attempt to destroy the beauty of it because it doesn't teach what you want it to teach.

How can believers ever find truth in God's Word if they cannot exegete their way out of a flimsy paper bag.

Let's learn proper HERMENEUTICS, discover the Bible really says, and with a spirit of humilty, ACCEPT IT.

You have to be kidding us with this nonsense. A preterist trying to tell everyone about proper hermeneutics? LOL. Get real.

 

[ScottA]

The "word of God as spirit." What does that even mean? You make no sense. The words of Hebrews 10:37 were written to actual people during an actual point in history for an actual reason. The day of the LORD was coming to them. The LORD was coming to THEM--"in a very, very little while." And I'M not acknowedging the word of God? Hmmm.

I will answer your question.

The word of God is spirit (John 6:63). The fact that you do not even know what that means speaks volumes, but it is a starting point. Meaning, you have no business speculating or making claims regarding the literary meaning of scripture. Not knowing what "God's word is spirit" even means, is a good indication that one is not born of that spirit of God--which I will not further speculate of you, because of forum rules.

But that--being born again of the spirit of God--is only the starting point of anyone fully understanding the scriptures, and anyone not doing so according to the spirit of God is getting ahead of themselves. I am speaking in general of "anyone." Simply put, "the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Corinthians 2:14). Therefore, anyone referring to the scriptures only literarily, based in worldly language and history alone, is disqualified of knowing the actual meaning of the words.

Without getting into specific verses, these are the terms and the biblical reality of the scriptures. If one does not abide by what the scriptures say of themselves--what the Word says of Himself, then there is no basis for such a dialog as has been attempted here, not on this thread passage, or any other.

Are you willing to abide?