Posted on 06/20/2010 5:14:46 PM PDT by Ken4TA
1. The Promise to Abraham
2. The Millennial Syndrome
3. Daniel’s Prophecy
4. What About The Rapture?
5. The Abomination of Desolation
Then there are those troublesome passages like Isaiah 66, Zechariah 14, Ezekiel 36-38... man-o-man, why can’t we just have a nice neat package of supercessionism and get on with our lives as the “new Israel” - why does the Bible always mess up our nice little praeterist theology?
Ping for study
And just where is that affront to G_d built?
How many buildings have been built on that location now? Which one is this?
Why are you trying to change what Scripture plainly says?
Here are quotes from two different Bibles (first one is NIV):
“When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ standing where it does not belong—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.
“The day is coming when you will see the sacrilegious object that causes desecration standing where he should not be.” (Reader, pay attention!) “Then those in Judea must flee to the hills.
How on earth you can interpret this as the general destruction is beyond me. I agree with the other poster. I don’t mind discussing our differences but when Scripture is very plain and people try to make it say something to fit in with their own belief, I guess I want to know why. I have no dog in the race. I believe in Jesus and that he died for me. Whether the fulfillment of certain prophecies happens in my lifetime or not does not change my status.
Therefore, I just want clarity on this for when I share the Gospel. Don’t want to argue here but I do think you are terribly mistaken.
Very good, and true to an extent. But what has that to do with the thread topic? There is nothing in it that would indicate that all prophecy is fulfilled - there is the book of Revelation to consider, I would think.
As for your other comment, well, I would disagree - and have already posted some thread (and will be posting more) that contradict what you said in your comment.
You tell me....
That is your perogative. Please read all the references in the 3 synoptic Gospels to understand what the phrase "abomination of desolation" means. I think it is very clear.
And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering ...
As I said before, the death of Christ did not literally end the sacrifice and grain offerings ... these literally ceased when the temple was destroyed 40 years later.
You can't really continue to seriously argue for the past fulfillment of Daniels 70 weeks until you address this issue.
How in the world do you get MAKE out of CONFIRM? The term "make" is not of part of that sentence in Daniel's prophecy. Jesus CONFIRMED the COVENANT that the Jews were under! And the apostles continued to CONFIRM that COVENANT for the next 3 1/2 years, "signs and wonder following them."
As I said before, the death of Christ did not literally end the sacrifice and grain offerings ... these literally ceased when the temple was destroyed 40 years later.
Literally, forgetting Christ's sacrifice, the ritual of the Jews sacrificing animals etcetera went on up to 70 AD, just as you say. However, in God's plan those sacrifices ceased with Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross - ALL sacrifices in the eyes of God were fulfilled with Jesus' sacrifice. What the Jews sacrificed after the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross doesn't mean beans - the NT is explicit on that!
You can't really continue to seriously argue for the past fulfillment of Daniels 70 weeks until you address this issue.
Issue addressed and I will seriously stand by what Curtis wrote in this article of his, for it is the same as I have concluded from my independent study of the issue over the last 40 years.
Luke: “But when you see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that her desolation is at hand. Then let them that are in Judea flee unto the mountains…and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles” (Luke 21:20–21, 24).
These are two separate occasions. Luke's account took place at the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD -- followed then by the Diaspora and times of the Gentiles just as Luke recorded that it would.
Matthew's account is yet future, occurring after the times of the Gentiles and the Diaspora.
The Josephus stuff was interesting though.
3rd times the charm
Hmmm...I disagree with that type of thinking for it's too unbelievable to think that Jesus' words meant two different time periods. Matthew wrote to the Jews, and Luke wrote to the Gentiles who weren't all that acquainted with the prophecies of the OT. In 70 AD there were many gentile Christians intermingled in the population of Jerusalem, and Lukes plain words gave them the warning of the prophecy. Notice that Luke didn't have to give a warning about the Sabbath day - Gentiles ignored particular days.
The abomination is the Obamanation
“Preterism doesn’t hold W.A.T.E.R.”
A short while ago, I realized that many people I know are holding to the ideas of preterism.
I wanted to re-read the gospel accounts of the Olivet discourse, since a frequent preterist poster on Freerepublic.com uses a verse to support his claims: “because these are the days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled” Luke 21:22.
I noticed that for preterism to be true, the following five events must have been fulfilled by now. Since they are NOT fulfilled, I find it difficult, if not impossible, to accept preterism.
I propose an acrostic to illustrate these events: W.A.T.E.R.
W = “worldwide total evangelism”, from Matt 24:14
A = “all tribes mourning the Son of Man”, from Matt 24:30
T = “times of the Gentiles fulfilled”, Luke 21:24
E = “elect gathered from the four winds”, Matt 24:31
R = “return of Jesus” - (how could this possibly have happened in 70 AD, as some preterists claim???) - from Matt 24:27.
This post is a brief introduction to this acrostic, as a reminder that “Preterism doesn’t hold W.A.T.E.R.”.
Too bad the author forgets to consider the meaning of temple.
I'm sure Curtis didn't forget the building of the temple :-)
In fact, one of the future posts concerns that very topic; it will be posted to a thread right after the next article is posted, which addresses "Armageddon". He actually wrote two articles on the temple; the second one an update to the first one: I have to consider if I want to post both of them, for they duplicate each other to an extent. Look for it in a couple of days. Thanks for your interest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.