'Glorious' latest Jesus blockbuster

CNN ^ | April 1st, 2004

[missyme]

LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) -- Seen the movie about Jesus' death? Now read the book about his return.

A novel about the return of Jesus is set to become one of the biggest selling books of the year in the United States as Mel Gibson's controversial film about his death breaks domestic box office records.

[xjcsa]

God, a thousand years is but a day.... Care to explain exactly when and how the events in Revelation occured during the first century?

Quick version....as I understand Preterism (which is the view being alluded to), most of the doomsday material in Revelation was in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem by Rome in 70 AD. Emperor Nero is identified as the anti-Christ, and the return of Christ is identified with the Roman army destroying Jerusalem. The old earth and heaven passing away is a representation of the Old Covenant between God and Man passing away; the New Heaven and New Earth are seen as references to the New Covenant in Christ.

I've been leaning toward preterism lately...and no, it's not a "liberal" doctrine.

[My2Cents]

Good summary.

and the return of Christ is identified with the Roman army destroying Jerusalem.

This is probably what some believe, but it's kind of a stretch, yes?

If this is how Revelation should be read, I'll make a motion to cut it from Scripture, because it obviously is irrelevant dead history that has no bearing on any of us. So, let's stop arguing about Revelation, and simply dump it from Scripture....(If these folks are correct.)

[missyme]

But the million dollar question is where is the New Heaven and New Earth? and does the Bible clearly tell us when the world will end? how it will end? and about Jesus's return

[BSunday]

It would take too much time and energy to do it on this forum, but I will find you a reasonable (non-premillenialistic) commentary and get back to you.

[My2Cents]

I appreciate your comment. Discussing these kind of things on the forum is difficult. If you send me a reasonable commentary (I had to laugh, because I know there are "unreasonable" commentaries on both sides -- frankly, I shook my head over the suggestion that the "glorious return of Christ" was symbolic of the Roman army sacking Jerusalem), I promise to read it.

[Chunga]

I have a problem with LaHaye's theology.

My reading of the Bible seems to tell me that the Antichrist is to appear before Christ's return. As such, I have a question for believers in the Rapture:

Do you believe it is possible that the Antichrist will actually descend to the earth, in the clouds, impersonating Jesus, in order to deceive, if it were possible, even the elect?

Dismissive posts are welcome, though not actually preferred.

[BSunday]

There is one that I have I like alot. It's the Commentary on the Book of Revelation by John T. Hinds. It's part of the Gospel Advocate NT Commentary Series. There is one that I have read that I liked better than that one but for the life of me I can't remember the author. I read it as a teenager and it helped me understand the book a lot.

[BSunday]

everything that destroys are great planet..

Whoa! God is going to destroy the democratic party ?? ;)

[BSunday]

I'll make a motion to cut it from Scripture, because it obviously is irrelevant dead history that has no bearing on any of us.

Well, using that logic, let's just cut out the Song of Solomon as well. After all, it is a book about the marital relationship, and not everybody is married. Maybe we should have a singles Bible and a Marrieds Bible.

Seriously though, much is to be learned by us in Revelation. For example, the glory of God in Heaven (for that reason alone the book is one of my favorites), that Good Wins, that God knows His own, that as Christians we must perservere, that there will be a time when there will be no more chances to come to God, need I go on ??

[BSunday]

Peter says the earth will be destroyed by fire. As to the new heaven and new earth, the bible only says that there will be one. Even if it is a literal meaning, which I will allow, it doesn't even say the new earth will be populated. IMO, if there is a literal new earth, there will be no humans on it. After all, Christ died ONCE for all. He's not coming back again to a new earth if the humans mess it up.

[BSunday]

Doesn't the Bible say there are many anti-Christs, in that anyone who denies Christ came in the flesh is an anti-Christ ?

What I can't understand is why take the passage in Thessalonians (can't cite it right now) that says the dead in Christ shall rise, then we will meet him in the air, and insert "(after a very long time, say 1000 years)" in it ? I think the 1000 yr reign is figurative and is happening right now. The book says we ARE priests and kings, not WILL BE kings, but ARE. So in that we have a superior spiritual station in Christ as opposed to a lost sinner, and that we have all spiritual blessings in Christ, and that we are adopted sons of God, and that our home in heaven is incorruptible, is that not like reigning with him ?

Anyway, I just could never understand how you can take one verse from the bible, add some to it in the exegesis, and throw in some very figurative passage from the Revelation and come up with not only a whole religious doctrine, but also get a whole bunch of people to buy into it.

[ladyinred]

"They (Tim LaHaye and others holding a similar interpretation of Revelation) are aggressively trying to influence American politics, especially in the Middle East," Rossing said.

Good grief, get a grip woman! It is a book, fiction, based on some Biblical facts. It isn't about politics in this sense. I am not a believer in the rapture either, but I have read every one of these and have the new one ordered!

She is a Lutheran she says, aren't we all supposed to be on the same side?

[missyme]

What? I am sorry I really did not understand your post? a New Earth would be humanless? maybe it is a spiritual world rather than earthly..... After all we will not come back with the afflictions of the human body we will not have an age since we will be eternal, so we will have to be in spirit like an angel don't you think...

[BSunday]

I don't have any real idea. It's just a theory. Your opinion on that is just as good as mine...

[P-Marlowe]

Revelation describes itself as a book of PROPHECY. Not a book of history. The letters to the seven churches were written to the first century churches, but the rest of the book describes the events preceeding his glorious appearing.

Now exactly when in the first Century was it that Jesus visibly returned to earth so that every eye saw him. Edward Gibbon apparently left that minor event out of his history of the Roman Empire.

[what's up]

Prophecy can signify future events...it can also signify events currently occurring. Think of Jeremiah the prophet. He is known as speaking prophecy. Yet he spoke often of current events in Israel along with what would happen in the future. The word "prophecy" simply means "utterance of God".

Revelation does contain descriptions of the end of history. But it is not completely about the end of the world. As you explained, the first 3 chapters deal with the 1st century church's current situation. After the first 3 chapters there are descriptions of what occurs during the Church Age (the NT church era as well as our era) and then there are also descriptions of judgment day.

My problem is with people who say that EVERYTHING in Revelation is still in the future, as the person on this thread stated. That is dead wrong. Much of what is in Revelation is past, some is occurring now, and then some will happen at judgment day.

[xjcsa]

I'll make a motion to cut it from Scripture, because it obviously is irrelevant dead history that has no bearing on any of us.

Good point. Let's do the same for Genesis, Exodus, heck, most of the Old Testament....and some of the New.... </sarcasm; meant kindly>

[xjcsa]

But the million dollar question is where is the New Heaven and New Earth? and does the Bible clearly tell us when the world will end? how it will end? and about Jesus's return?

Well, according to the preterist view, the New Covenant is the New Heaven and the New Earth. To the First Century Jew, the Old Covenant (as we call it) was the entire heaven and earth; the apocalyptic language used by John in Revelation would have been entirely accurate in their view (and they were his primary audience).

As for the end of the world, a preterist would say that the Bible does not tell us anything; the world may go on indefinitely, or God may do as He chooses.

As far as the return of Christ, a (full) preterist would say that He DID return with the Roman army in 70 AD, and we missed it (again!).

[Ciexyz]

This is one book I'll be checking out!

[xjcsa]

Revelation describes itself as a book of PROPHECY. Not a book of history.

Nobody disputes that Revelation contains prophecy. However, Revelation was not written last week; many would contend (with significant factual and logical support) that much or all of that prophecy was fulfilled within a few decades of its writing.