Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Another False Prophet Exposed
eschatology.org ^ | Monday, 13 February 2012 05:15 | Don Preston

Posted on 12/20/2013 1:03:07 AM PST by Stingray

Several months ago someone sent me a copy of a book: 2008 God’s Final Witness, by Ronald Weinland. It was suggested to me that perhaps I should challenge Mr. Weinland to debate me. As I scanned the book, I decided that the best response overall was to allow time to respond to Mr. Weinland, and my thinking has been vindicated.

You see, Mr. Weinland claims that, “When this book is published at the end of summer of 2006, there will be a maximum of two years remaining before the world will be plunged into the worst time in human history” (p. 244). Mr. Weinland is (was) so absolutely positive of his predictions that he actually claimed to be one of the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11, “I am God’s end-time witness and spokesman” (p. 111). So, here we are in 2012, nothing, absolutely nothing that Mr. Weinland-- God's final witness!!-- predicted has come true.

(Excerpt) Read more at eschatology.org ...


TOPICS: Apologetics; General Discusssion; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: endtimes; eschatology; fulfilledprophecy; preterism
I'm posting this both as a discussion and as a request.

First the request: please provide a "full preterism caucus" for the discussion of topics relating to fulfilled Bible prophecy. (The author of the article, linked above, is a "full preterist.")

Now, the discussion. Mr. Preston closes his article, linked above, with the following:

"It is time, past time, for Bible students to accept the inspired truth that the events of the end were near in the first century, and they were fulfilled in the first century, just as predicted. All futurist eschatologies are false. Men such as Mr. Weinland are an embarrassment to the cause of the truth of Christ, and give the skeptics of the world ammunition for their attacks on the Lord."

I couldn't agree more. I know there are several people on this site as tired as I am of seeing false promises, false prophecies, and false teachers proclaiming the "soon return" of Christ. Yet many are afraid to speak up because of the "Alinsky-ite" tactics of Futurists, who debase discussion through inflammatory rhetoric and ridicule.

If you're as tired as I am of false teachers and false promises, let's discuss what Christ, His apostles, and history really have to say about these things.

Merry Christmas!

1 posted on 12/20/2013 1:03:08 AM PST by Stingray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Stingray

Obama was elected 2 years later

That was definitely end time stuff

lol


2 posted on 12/20/2013 1:07:41 AM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

“Obama was elected 2 years later That was definitely end time stuff lol”

And while there was a time even I would’ve taken such a view quite seriously, unfortunately Obama cannot be THE Anti-christ. THAT Anti-Christ was supposedly MUCH smarter! ;)


3 posted on 12/20/2013 1:13:22 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

I’ve never really started a “caucus thread” before, so I’m not even sure how such a thing works. I figured I would take the request public to see if the rel_mod would make it happen (if there is, indeed, an “it” there.)

Just to head off any questions in advance, full preterism believes that all eschatology or “end times” events were fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem, including the resurrection of the dead and Jesus’ Second Coming, or Parousia, and the Final Judgment.

I came from the futurist/dispensationalist paradigm, having believed in a yet future return of Christ most of my Christian life (30+ years and counting). A little more than 5 years ago, I began to look at the Biblical record anew, vowing to follow the evidence wherever it led. I didn’t take anyone’s word for it, neither preterist nor futurist, but examined the Biblical language and history itself, often spending 5 hours a night with multiple translations of the Bible open, including Greek, Hebrew, and literal “word-for-word” translations.

The results of those 5+ years of intensive study have led me to one inescapable conclusion: the eschatology of Christ and His apostles is completely and utterly at odds with the eschatology being taught in mainline churches and seminaries today.

Hopefully, as we move forward in this joint venture, we can have a serious discussion about what full preterism is, what it means, and its implications in a world hungry for truth. I’ve started this journey with the article, linked above, because false promises are what started me down this path, and it all began with a very simple question: why have so many people been so wrong about Christ’s “soon return” for so very many years?

If you’re wondering that, too: welcome.


4 posted on 12/20/2013 1:33:58 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

“Obama was elected 2 years later”

“result in the total demise of the United States within two years”

Well, I just read the description of the book. Never heard of this guy. Yep, setting dates and claiming to be one the Two Witnesses. Gross error. I’d say ‘unbelievable’ but then again, we saw Harold Camping (I was passed by three of his May, 2011 trucks on the highway a couple years ago).

However, I think O is gonna finish off the country financially. Or put us in such terrible shape (virtually already) that recovering will be impossible. The 17 Trillion Dollar nation debt is only the tip of the iceberg if people look at the actual unfunded liabilities.


5 posted on 12/20/2013 1:37:30 AM PST by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Stingray; Religion Moderator

The Religion Moderator can approve a new caucus thread -— simply contact them.


6 posted on 12/20/2013 1:38:12 AM PST by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

Thanks F15Eagle! :)


7 posted on 12/20/2013 1:40:49 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

;)


8 posted on 12/20/2013 1:41:47 AM PST by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

Marking, for later reading. Hey, Stingray, long time, no see. Be well, and Merry Christmas!


9 posted on 12/20/2013 1:53:23 AM PST by logos (Only an educated intellectual will consistently misread plain language.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

http://www.beholdthebeast.com


10 posted on 12/20/2013 3:42:16 AM PST by noprogs (Borders, Language, Culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: noprogs

Your link is precisely the kind of information that this caucus will seek to expose as fraudulent, because such interpretation leads to the kind of false prophets and teachers that have risen and fallen throughout the last 2,000 years.


11 posted on 12/20/2013 3:50:06 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: logos

Thanks, logos! It’s a pleasure to see some of the old timers still around! :)


12 posted on 12/20/2013 3:52:04 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

I do not believe ALL the answers can be found in any human’s finite mind. As sensible as this site is, they totally avoid the subject of the Sixth Seal War. I’m still seeking and studying.

That being said, the Mathematical Precision of Biblical Prophecy and the identification of the Leopard Bear Lion Beast makes better sense of the Scriptures than anything I have ever read. If you haven’t already, please look at all of this.

I had my doubts about the whole Pre Trib rapture/Futurist interpretations for a long time, and now believe it to be totally false.


13 posted on 12/20/2013 4:20:16 AM PST by noprogs (Borders, Language, Culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: noprogs

“I do not believe ALL the answers can be found in any human’s finite mind.”

I don’t either. Thank God we have His inspired word to guide us.

“That being said, the Mathematical Precision of Biblical Prophecy...”

Much if which is superimposed on the text by people juggling numbers.

“...and the identification of the Leopard Bear Lion Beast makes better sense of the Scriptures than anything I have ever read.”

First of all, the Lion, Bear, Leopard, “Terrible Beast” metaphors correspond to the four great world empires that would have significant influence over the Holy Land. The Lion was the Babylonian Empire, the Bear was Persia, the Leopard was Greece, and the “Terrible Beast” was Rome.

Babylon was responsible for the destruction of the first Temple and Jerusalem in 586 BC, when Judea’s people were carried into captivity.

Persia was represented in this particular vision by the Bear, raised up on its side with three ribs in its mouth. These three ribs represented three areas in what we now know as modern day Turkey; regions which Persia conquered in its drive west toward the Mediterranean and Greece. Of significance to the Jews: King Cyrus of Persia issued the decree that allowed the Jews back into their homeland to rebuild the Temple.

The Leopard is Greece that divides into 4 primary kingdoms after Alexander’s death. Two of these battle over Judea for some time: the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucids of Syria. The Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes sacked Jerusalem and outlawed the practice of Mosaic Law. His reign is covered briefly in Daniel 8 and extensively in both Daniel 11 and 1Maccabees.

Finally, Rome is the great and terrible beast. During the Maccabean Revolt against the Syrian Greeks, Jerusalem sent envoys to Rome to ask the Roman Senate for aid against their enemies. Rome signed a pact with Jerusalem that lasted almost 100 years. When Jerusalem tried to back out of the deal, (and I’m condensing years of history here), Rome sent Pompey to conquer the city and occupy Jerusalem.

During this time of Roman occupation, Tiberius Caesar issues the decree that brings Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem to be counted and taxed. They had a son. You know the rest of the story.

The web of prophecy leading to the birth, death, and resurrection of Messiah in the OT has nothing to do with what people read in the news or see on TV today. Nothing. There is no more singular significant event in the history of the world than the birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and it was this event about which the thread of OT prophecy revolves. It really is no more complicated than that.


14 posted on 12/20/2013 5:28:10 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Stingray
First the request: please provide a "full preterism caucus" for the discussion of topics relating to fulfilled Bible prophecy. (The author of the article, linked above, is a "full preterist.")

Caucus means, chitchat amongst yourselves, do not discuss the views of those not part of your caucus, who are barred from responding. The Dispensational caucus seems to break that regularly. Will yours be better behaved?

15 posted on 12/20/2013 5:30:31 AM PST by Lee N. Field ("You keep using that verse, but I do not think it means what you think it means.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: noprogs

Augustus Caesar issued the census decree, not Tiberius. That’s what I get for trying to type all this from memory. :(


16 posted on 12/20/2013 5:38:28 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Lee N. Field

“Caucus means, chitchat amongst yourselves, do not discuss the views of those not part of your caucus, who are barred from responding. The Dispensational caucus seems to break that regularly. Will yours be better behaved?”

I hope so. We’ll see.


17 posted on 12/20/2013 5:40:06 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Stingray
All you have to do is label the caucus in the title. It's wise to do it at the beginning, as in [Full Preterism Caucus] Another False Prophet Exposed

Since this is something new, you'll probably have to explain it to quite a few posters, and maybe the Religion Moderators, but if it catches on, eventually people will know what it means and either participate or avoid it.

18 posted on 12/20/2013 6:15:31 AM PST by Tax-chick ("Our infinite sadness can only be cured by an infinite love." ~Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Stingray; GeronL; F15Eagle

There is no way this can be a caucus thread. The article itself includes disparaging dispensationalists. In a caucus thread none of that can happen.


19 posted on 12/20/2013 6:47:38 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

LOL

You did well!

As for the Gentleman behind the website I mentioned, he isn’t one of these blow dried modern folk, but continues in the historical perspective of the prophecies. Your interpretations (which I am just beginning to investigate) and his seem to agree on quite a few points.

His interpretations of the 1260 days and the 1335 days in Daniel, which were prophecies to and about Israel/Judea make a lot of sense. Again, the only real omission I see in Skolfield’s work is any mention of the Sixth Seal War........which I personally believe is in our future.

I’m no Bible scholar, being trained in engineering, with a low tolerance for emotionalism and a high respect for logic. I keep in mind that God does things in the most difficult and unlikely ways so His influence can be seen by those seeking Him. (Think of 90 year old Sarah bearing a child)

Let’s keep each other in our prayers.


20 posted on 12/20/2013 7:47:53 AM PST by noprogs (Borders, Language, Culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
There is no way this can be a caucus thread. The article itself includes disparaging dispensationalists. In a caucus thread none of that can happen.

I don't think you want to be claiming Ronald Weinland. Google him. Armstrongism spin-off. Eschatological quirks are the least of the problem.

I didn't see anything in the linked article about anyone other than him.

In a caucus thread none of that can happen.

Except when it does.

21 posted on 12/20/2013 7:58:42 AM PST by Lee N. Field ("You keep using that verse, but I do not think it means what you think it means.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: noprogs

“Let’s keep each other in our prayers”

Agreed. :)


22 posted on 12/20/2013 8:50:45 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

The article itself includes disparaging dispensationalists.”

I wasn’t aware that calling someone out who claimed to be one of the two witnesses in Revelation, yet whose predictions for the soon return of Christ, was disparaging them.

If he is wrong, that makes him a false prophet. The point of this caucus will be to explain why all such prophets and predictions are false, so that people won’t be duped by such charlatans again. If your point in being here is to defend such blatantly false prophets and teachers such as the one noted in the link, this probably wouldn’t be the best place for you.


23 posted on 12/20/2013 9:05:38 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

Yeah I know. But we’ll keep ours and they can have one, I suppose for themselves. I laughed at how unfair it is (not his comment).


24 posted on 12/20/2013 9:40:09 AM PST by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

Let’s try this reply again, as I had typed it on my mobile phone and it didn’t come out right.

You: “The article itself includes disparaging dispensationalists.”

I wasn’t aware that calling someone out who claimed to be one of the two witnesses in Revelation, yet whose predictions for the soon return of Christ were completely wrong, was disparaging them.

If he is wrong, that makes him a false prophet. The point of this caucus will be to explain why all such prophets and predictions are false, so that people won’t be duped by such charlatans again. If your point in being here is to defend such blatantly false prophets and teachers, this probably wouldn’t be the best place for you.


25 posted on 12/20/2013 10:02:13 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Lee N. Field
>>I don't think you want to be claiming Ronald Weinland.<<

No I don’t. But caucus threads are not supposed to talk about those of opposing views. While I also don’t agree with Catholics, Mormon’s and many others I wouldn’t agree with a caucus thread that didn’t allow them to refute comments made about them. Would you for instance think a caucus thread that disparaged Calvinists was ok with you?

26 posted on 12/20/2013 10:48:58 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

You probably weren’t aware that caucus threads don’t mention any other beliefs other than the one the caucus is supposedly for.


27 posted on 12/20/2013 10:50:45 AM PST by CynicalBear (For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Stingray; CynicalBear
CynicalBear would not be defending a false prophet. This guy, from a cursory read, appears to be Church of God, who fell for Herbert W. Armstrong and his British-Israelism.

There are some people who may read too much into stuff and may misinterpret things and then there are true false prophets (I put Joseph Smith into the latter).

Of course, we're all never going to agree so I'm all for you guys having your own caucus.

;)

28 posted on 12/20/2013 10:58:04 AM PST by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

“You probably weren’t aware that caucus threads don’t mention any other beliefs other than the one the caucus is supposedly for.”

This isn’t a caucus thread. It’s a request for a caucus thread. There’s a difference.


29 posted on 12/20/2013 11:19:49 AM PST by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

It won’t become a caucus thread because caucus thread decorum has not been even remotely observed. Doing so would require half the replies be deleted.


30 posted on 12/20/2013 11:21:36 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
No I don’t. But caucus threads are not supposed to talk about those of opposing views. While I also don’t agree with Catholics, Mormon’s and many others I wouldn’t agree with a caucus thread that didn’t allow them to refute comments made about them. Would you for instance think a caucus thread that disparaged Calvinists was ok with you?

I've got no problem with the caucus system. I observe it. I report abuse when I see it. Sometimes the moderator agrees, sometimes not.

31 posted on 12/20/2013 3:06:25 PM PST by Lee N. Field ("You keep using that verse, but I do not think it means what you think it means.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Stingray; Religion Moderator; CynicalBear

Just some FRiendly advice. A caucus is for like minded folks (see Catholic caucus articles). Which means for your full prederist view, only those who are full prederists should be posting and discussing full prederist material. Which means pre-mil folks can observe but not debate what you are posting. Which also means a particular caucus cannot post something baiting an opposing view to come in and respond.

For example, the Roman Catholics post an article on the veneration of Mary and make it caucus. A Prot cannot come on and tell them they are worshipping and not venerating.

I think your intent is inform people who disagree with you or people who do not have firm beliefs on the matter. That is fine but that is not what I understand a caucus is about. You should, by my understanding of the rules, be discussing full prederist issues with fellow full prederists. When you make a thread a caucus you in effect light a ring of fire around your world and only those inside the circle can comment.

If a Roman Catholic would attempt to post a caucus thread named “Luther was a demon”, I am sure the RM would remove that thread or turn it into an open thread.

So by coming out and saying you were going to expose the pre-mil view as a fraud, you automatically should lose the protection of the ‘caucus’ status.

Unless it is your intent to proselytize your position. If that is the case I don’t know what fits honestly.


32 posted on 12/20/2013 3:20:27 PM PST by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

I think his point is, in a caucus you can discuss your views with others of your view but once you start comparing your views with others, the protection of the caucus should be lifted.

For example, perhaps instead of trying to refute every other theory out there, you can use your caucus to actually present your view. Which I see as a nagging problem for full prederists because they only react to other views and never fully present their view for others to examine. Perhaps having a caucus where you actually present your views in detail and as stand alone would work.


33 posted on 12/20/2013 3:32:05 PM PST by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Stingray
This isn’t a caucus thread. It’s a request for a caucus thread. There’s a difference.

Well I guess the barn door is already open. Normally use the PM function to contact the moderator to get permission before posting the article.

34 posted on 12/20/2013 3:34:34 PM PST by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter; Stingray
You are correct. Mentioning non-caucus members' beliefs would result in the label being removed and the thread being opened for general discussion.
35 posted on 12/20/2013 6:56:46 PM PST by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson