Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Why 70 A.D. and why predictions | Matt 16:28 | stjohn | 183934 | ||
Hello again Tom: the last note cut me off as I went over the limit, so I will finish here, sorry. Ok: Now; having said all that; (see #183933) lets look at matt.5:17 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." The NASB uses "abolish" instead of fulfill. I don't Know if this is a better translation. I am not an expert in greek by any means, but i think it might help us to understand what our Lord is saying. "Fulfill", "The law and the prophets", I hope we can agree that no one; other then our lord Jesus, ever could fulfill the law, "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" and, I hope we can agree that our Lord jesus, certainly fulfilled all of the prophesies that were written about Him in the OT. And, as under the new covenant, we, now no longer under the law, we are now filled with God's Spirit, born again, we now have the law (also a fulfillment of prophesy) written on the tablets of our hearts. Well thats all for now, I pray we can continue the discussion. peas stj |
||||||
2 | Why 70 A.D. and why predictions | Matt 16:28 | Tomret | 183962 | ||
Thanks stj for your generous comments. Your observations are very insightful. First let me note the Septuagint version of this verse: "8:21 And the Lord God smelled a smell of sweetness, and the Lord God having considered, said, I will not any more curse the earth, because of the works of men, because the imagination of man is intently bent upon evil things from his youth, I will not therefore any more smite all living flesh as I have done." The only difference I wish to note here is that instead of "said in His heart," He only "said" here indicating the words were spoken not communicated telepathically as I previously suggested. Promise does not appear in Gen. 8:21. As you noted previously, chapter 9 is a continuation and elaboration of verse 21 thus they are linked together. You correctly note the word destroy does not appear here. Indeed the flood did not destroy the earth but the inhabitants of it save those on the ark. As for the comma you mention, the original Hebrew had no punctuation - or vowels for that matter.Now, I arrived at these verses seeking evidence that the NT interpretations of many futurists indicating vaporization of the earth and dissolving of the heavens is in error. Even though I admitted for ever could be a long time as well as eternal, I still take Ecc. 1:4 to mean eternal. I agree about OT events being twofold foretelling the final judgement, but the question is when. I think on 1 Thess. 4:16-17 we will have much agreement. I beleive this absolutely describes the saints being taken up to be with the Lord. But, again we will have differences on when. Indulge me for a moment and consider the possibility that the 2nd coming occured in 70AD as you read the following: http://www.preteristarchive.com/Preterism/stevens-ed_p_01.html : Silence Demands a Rapture, which brought me back to the first question I had when first exposed to the preterist view - why did no one make any mention of the judgement after the fact? For several decades after 70AD virtually nothing was written. It even occured to me then that a literal rapture would account for it, but all that I read from the modern preterist writers saw being caught up as symbolic. Now this writer has convinced me the rapture, being caught up in the air, was literal. If all true Christians were taken up, there was no one left to explain the scriptures, so succeeding generations were left to try to interpret them. With those that were left being of the persuasion that their Messiah - a worldly warrior king - was yet to come, how long was it until anybody even tried to understand the Gospels and words of the Apostles? Did this future expectation influence their interpretation? And consider their plight - the NT was not in a book form. They had no concordance or commentaries or internet. This could explain the multitude of interpretations we have. Now to your last point, does not "all prophesy" include the coming in judgement? If we are under the new law, does that not verify the judgement is past? Tom |
||||||