Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | First Century Second Coming? | John 5:19 | Xerxes | 128155 | ||
Good afternoon everyone. I have read through this line of posts, and I have some questions for both sides. 1) Those arguing against the 1st century return: Jesus said his coming would be like a thief in the night, like lightning flashes from west to east, like in the days of Noah or Sodom, that they wouldn't know until it was too late. Is it possible that He came, and no one documented it because the nature of the return was such that no one but certain elect recognized it for what it was? Is it possible that He came, but no one saw it in the strictest sense as we expect because, like lightning flashes, the coming was over and done before they knew it, bringing in the New Kingdom with the destruction of Jerusalem? 2) Those arguing for a 1st century return: Do you have reasonable explanations for the post-apostolic writings that still expected His return? Besides the obvious wrath God took upon Jerusalem which is not conclusive to the return, only to judgment, do you have any other reason to believe the return took place? 3) Those arguing against a 1st century return, do you have an explanation to refute the coincidence that Nero Caesar counted in Hebrew equals 666 by the Hebrew numbering system, he persecuted the Christians for 42 full months (Dec. 64 - May 68), died by the sword, was one of seven rulers (Julius, Antony, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero), one of which was slain (Julius), that Vespasian and Titus came to make war on Israel, speaking with the authority of Caesar while not being Caesar, and all this in accordance with Rev. 13? 4) Those arguing for a 1st century return: How do you reckon the thousand year reign spoken of in the Revelation without spiritualizing it into something metaphorical (barring any obvious context to suggest it should be viewed as such)? 5) Those arguing against a 1st century return: What explanation do you have for the plain statements in Matthew posted in this thread without spiritualizing them into something metaphorical to suggest that "here now" language is intended to represent "there then" meaning without any reasonable cause outside of premillenialism theology? 6) Those arguing for a 1st century return: What is your explanation of the two witnesses in Revelation that die for 3 1/2 days and are resurrected and taken up to heaven? As this is a preliminary to the return that doesn't take place until later in the book, do you have a reasonable/historical explanation for these two persons without spiritualizing them as metaphorical to substantiate a preterist theology? 7) Those arguing against a 1st century return: Do you have an explanation for the coincidence of approximately 3 years 7 months from the beginning of the seige around the passover of 66 until the destruction of the temple and Titus standing in the Holy of Holies in Tammuz/Ab of 70, and then roughly another month until the complete taking of Jerusalem in Elul of 70, all in accordance with Daniel who described 1290 days from the ceasing of the normal sacrifice (which happened after this last passover due to famine, then destruction of the temple proper) to the abomination that makes desolate standing in the Holy Place, then another month until upper Jerusalem was taken? 8) Those arguing for a 1st century return: If the return has happened already, and we are in the kingdom of Christ on earth, can you give an explanation why there is still horrible crime, etc., when God is supposed to wipe away all tears, and that there would be no more death? Please be objective, or stop discussing the topic. Some of you are already stepping over the line into insults, and that is not becoming of Christians. Xerxes |
||||||
2 | First Century Second Coming? | John 5:19 | following him | 128246 | ||
Hi Xerxes: I must say, I appreciate you stance of neutrality in this issue. It is a difficult thing to remain neutral when playing the “devil’s advocate” toward both sides. However, I’m not convinced that you do not hold to either side. I believe you’re just not telling us which side you hold to and that’s fine. There are only two choices of six that are viable. Non-viable options: 1. Jesus never came in the first place 2. Jesus came and died but didn’t rise from the grave (and variations to this idea) 3. Jesus is/has come right now, right now, right now, right now to infinity 4. Jesus wont be coming back Only viable options: 1. Jesus has come back (at any time between His ascension and right now, right now, etc) 2. Jesus will be coming back. (at some time between right now, right now, etc and eternity future) The question is which side the scriptures support the most (including the allegorizing). You must include possible allegories because Jesus himself allegorized many things 1. You are the salt of the earth 2. You are the light of the world 3. You must eat my flesh and drink my blood 4. He said to Peter “Feed my sheep” Jesus was a carpenter, but I suppose He could have had a flock of sheep somewhere. 5. Much of the book of Revelation which Jesus gave is allegorical. I can’t image a real beast with seven heads coming out of the sea and people bowing down and worshipping it. But people will do strange things. Do we have to understand all the scriptures pertaining to this issue (Which by the way is pretty much most of the Bible? There are two basic themes in the scriptures 1. That God created the world and no one else did and 2. The redemption of that world He created and which man had lost.) I dont think so. Nor does mean that we won’t change views if we find more evidence later that supports the opposite view. I at the current time of writing this hold to the premil position. Part of my reasoning behind holding to this view is the fact that God has set a pattern of dealing with man on and in the physical realm. 1. He revealed Himself in it Rom 1:20 2. His judgments upon the nations including Israel (OT) 3. His mercies and favor upon those who call upon Him 4. Christ’ death and resurrection. 5. The expectation of a physical reigning of the messiah on the throne of David by all the prophets. 6. The expectation of the creation itself of redemption (Rom 8:19-23) I have to conclude that Jesus will follow the precedent that God set and His return will result in many physical / creation changes including but not limited to: 1. The lion and the lamb side by side 2. The child able to put its hand on a vipers nest 3. All tears be wiped away 4. Sickness done away with 5. Creation restored 6. Etc. But since the time of Adam to today the world is still obviously still under the curse (crime, sickness, death etc) I must conclude that Jesus has not come back yet. And in my view the scriptures and history better supports the premil view. Now concerning this portion of Josephus, you inserted into one of your posts “Besides these, a few days after that feast, on the one and twentieth day of the month Artemisius [Jyar], a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared: I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armor were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding the cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the temple,] as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, “Let us remove hence.” I am assuming this is referring to around 70AD when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and that you are suggesting that this could represent Christ’ return upon the clouds. There is another explanation for this vision. In the OT we see several instances where angelic hosts were to provide protection to individuals and cities. I believe it was Elisha who prayed that his servant’s eyes would be opened to see the angelic host protecting them from an enemy. One angel destroyed 185,000 Assyrians during Hezekiah’s time. In Dan 12:1 we see that Michael stands guard over Israel. It is possible that this vision was one of seeing the angelic host which was stationed around the cities of Israel for protection being withdrawn so that the Roman army could come and fulfill what Jesus spoke about the destruction of Jerusalem. And those that saw this vision were the same ones that rejected Christ and were seeing the result of that rejection. It may not have anything to do with the Lord’s return. Just another possibility. Blessings to you |
||||||
3 | First Century Second Coming? | John 5:19 | Xerxes | 128278 | ||
Hey following him. You are observant and intuitive. I do, in fact, have a side that I lean a little more towards. It is still a true statement, however, that I am undecided. As I've pointed out in previous posts, both theories have holes that can't be explained without twisting things to suit the purpose. Both theories also have strengths that can't be refuted except to ignore or disregard them. Don't be disappointed that I didn't do a bigger post. I read all that you said, and it comfirms one of the two in ways I had already comprehended the strengths. The quote from Josephus: Yes, it could have had nothing to do with Jesus' return whatsoever. It could have simply been God abandoning the Jews to the Romans because of their wickedness. However, it could also have been a documented reference to Rev 19:11-18. Viewing it with an open mind, I recognize that either could be the case. Thus I choose not to stand on either. Thanks for responding. Xerxes |
||||||