Posted on 04/12/2007 8:31:50 AM PDT by xzins
Enough of the insults.
If you cannot post to me or anyone else without resorting to vile personal attacks, then please do not post to me again.
Your primary method of debate is to insult your opponent and to question their motives. You accuse your opponents of dishonesty and being carnal simply because they do not accept your rather inconsistent hermenutics.
So if you can't debate without these personal attacks, then please do not include me in your posts.
Thank you.
Nope. The style’s the same. You engage in personal attack, insulting and condescending innuendo, and in direct and implied character assassination.
Interesting, though......that style....is so reminiscent....
Shhhhh.....
..........
(He’s out in the desert....)
(He’s in some inner room.....)
“Did Jesus return in 70AD?” ~ xzins
X, M-PI posted a bit of the discussion about 70AD. The "return" of our Lord in 70AD was the ushering in of the Church age. I think this is a reasonable interpretation if you hold to a view that the Old Testament was one age and the New Testament is a new age.
Did Jesus return in 70AD? It seems to me this is around the time the Gentiles were becoming accepted into the church, the death of Peter and Paul, etc. The destruction of the temple was the last vestage of the old age, the scattering of believers and the beginning of the new.
Christ did return since we can look around us at His great handiwork through the church, we believe He is reigning on His throne, and He is actively engaged in our lives. Did He physically return on April 7, 70AD in downtown Jerusalem? No. But we believe that Christ is physically reigning and it is a historical fact that the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD was a significant force for the Christian church. It makes perfect sense to me.
Do I believe in a physical return of Christ? Of course. It will be a time when He will call the final believers out and execute judgment. It will be the close of this age.
I think you meant to write, "bodily" return because I know you believe that Christ now has a "glorified body", as the fully God, and fully man, "God-man." All those resurrected from the dead are given "glorified bodies" which are no longer subject to _physical_ problems, including death.
Great reply! bttt
The return you posit does not match a grammatical, historical, or literary reading of the text.
Of course any attgempt to do so with immediately demonstrate the inherent weakness of your position since you would actually have to deal with the text and related texts, e.g., “Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom." (Matt. 16:28)
Constantly saying "nay nay" doesn’t cut the mustard.
LOL! Riiiiight...cause you see so many preterists writing novels about their eschatology, and hosting news programs giving daily updates on how current events point to eschatology, and starting entire churches with eschatology as their central focus.
PLEASE! Premill pre-tribbers have cornered the market on selling eschatology, and it pays handsomly. But don't dare express skepticism of it lest you be labelled a heretic and be met with fiery judgement (of course, in this case it's only figuratively fiery).
That happened on Penetecost.
I think this is a reasonable interpretation if you hold to a view that the Old Testament was one age and the New Testament is a new age.
The New Testament began with the Birth of Christ and the ministry of John the Baptist.
Did Jesus return in 70AD? It seems to me this is around the time the Gentiles were becoming accepted into the church, the death of Peter and Paul, etc.
Esigesis.
Did every eye see him? No. 70AD is not the coming of Christ. The Church came well before 70AD. There were dozens of active and vital Gentile Churches before 70AD. All of Paul's letters were addressed to Gentile Churches scattered throughout the world. So the Church age did not begin in 70AD. By 70AD we were already into the second generation of Christians.
The Church age began with Pentecost and will continue until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled.
Something important happens after that.
Actually, the very fact you would make such a statement shows just how much the opposite is true
Interesting, though......that style....is so reminiscent....
Can we expect a public apology when you successfully get another poster banned under false charges of being a retread?
The rank hypocrisy in your statements here is rather odious, x. I know for a fact topcat is not a retread, so save your breath and your own character assassination attempts and stick with the topic, k?
PROVE IT, x. Stop simply making generalized and unsupported statements like this and put you money where your mouth is.
Eschatological Miscellany http://www.tektonics.org/esch/hcesh.html
Did Hebrews and the Catholic Epistles Wrongly Place Themselves in the “Last Days”?
James Patrick Holding
This portion of our study shall be relatively short, as there is little to consider that we have not already covered; what is left is a matter of application. Since as we have determined the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in 70 AD, it is obvious that some references — (as in Paul) http://www.tektonics.org/esch/paulend.html — can be resolved on that basis. But let’s look at cites individually.
Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds...
“Last days” — but of what? As shown in our Olivet essay, most likely that “last days” of the age of the law, ushering in the age of the Messiah. This fits in of course with Hebrews’ theme of the superiority of the new covenant. This is confirmed in our next cite:
Hebrews 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
As in the Olivet Discourse, the word “world” in “end of the world” is aion, or age — a period of time, in other words, the age of the law vs. the age of the Messiah. (”World” in “foundation of the world” however is kosmos, the created order.)
Hebrews 10:37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.
As noted in previous essays, the events of 70 AD constituted a “coming” — Hebrews clearly anticipates this.
James 5:8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.
“Coming” here is parousia, the word used by Matthew to refer to events of 70 AD. It is interesting that James, who shows affinities with Matthew’s gospel and the Sermon on the Mount as recorded there, also uses the same term. Indeed, it is used in the works of James, John and Peter, the Jewish “inner circle” — but not in Hebrews, which may have been written by Luke. (Hebrews uses erchomai above; a common word, but it is the one Luke uses also.)
1 Peter 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you...
Last times — of what? Again, the age of the law.
1 Peter 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.
“All things! That means the end of the whole sausage, Holding!”
If it does, then what’s the point in being sober and watching? The phrase “all things” is used 171 times in the KJV NT, and I challenge anyone to find a place where it clearly would not have “exceptions”. This is a phrase that clearly and contextually means, “all that is relevant in this context.” If it meant the end of the created order, what do we make of Mark 4:34? “But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.” All things? Including for example the mating habits of sea slugs? I guess the disciples are still sitting there now. And our next verse shows this further:
2 Peter 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
The word here too is parousia, and this fits in nicely with Jewish scoffers in the 50s and early 60s, within the predicted “generation,” figuring that with the Romans still wagging their tails there isn’t much to worry about where Jesus’ predictions were concerned. (Parousia is also used in 2 Pet. 1:16.)
2 Peter 3:10, 12 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up...Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
Problem here? No more so than it was in Olivet when we hear of the moon turning to blood and such. This is just the usual Jewish apocalyptic hyperbole, representing the refashioning of the social and political order — not a literal description of history as it shall happen. See more here. http://www.tektonics.org/tsr/tillpfft.html
1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.(cf. 4:3)
The last time, or hour — of what? Once again, of the age of the law — and this fits in very well with Jesus’ Olivet prediction of false Christs.
1 John 2:28 And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.
This one also fits 70 AD; the word “coming” is parousia.
Since we have laid our groundwork elsewhere, little else needs be said in conclusion. Hebrews and the Catholic epistles provide no grounds for supposing an erroneous view of a “soon return” of Christ in the way critics think.
Actually, I’ve never had anyone banned. Nor have I said that TC is a retread. I said the STYLE is reminiscent.....and it is.
You left out this one:
Post 86. "I'll be straight up and call you a prevaricator."
I dare say that may be a prophetic number.
Indeed. Reminds me of the old Cal-Arm wars. There were a lot of casualties among those with similar tactics.
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.