Futurist application of Matthew 24 to the end times

[steve7150]

steve7150, it truly is unfortunate you cannot shake your indoctrination, and I say this kindly, I really do. This is what I mean by this statement, in bullet format (I will admit that I'm being presumptive):

> You were probably taught to read the scriptures as if most, if not all, promises, prophecies, and personnel pronoun usage regarding the afore mentioned, "actually refers TO YOU"





No Robby i don't think all promises refer to me nor do i think everything refers to 70AD. IMO Preterism is the biblical definition of "overkill."
A couple of points,
I still don't see where preaching the gospel to some limited areas in Rome fulfills "making disciples of all the nations."
In Matthew 24 it appears that verses 1 - 24 do refer to the destruction of Jerusalem and parallel Luke 21 , but starting at verse 35 it appears to parallel Luke 17 which everyone except Full Preterists believe is about the second coming.

[robbyyoung]

steve7150, it truly is unfortunate you cannot shake your indoctrination, and I say this kindly, I really do. This is what I mean by this statement, in bullet format (I will admit that I'm being presumptive):

> You were probably taught to read the scriptures as if most, if not all, promises, prophecies, and personnel pronoun usage regarding the afore mentioned, "actually refers TO YOU"





No Robby i don't think all promises refer to me nor do i think everything refers to 70AD. IMO Preterism is the biblical definition of "overkill."
A couple of points,
I still don't see where preaching the gospel to some limited areas in Rome fulfills "making disciples of all the nations."
In Matthew 24 it appears that verses 1 - 24 do refer to the destruction of Jerusalem and parallel Luke 21 , but starting at verse 35 it appears to parallel Luke 17 which everyone except Full Preterists believe is about the second coming.

Ok Bro. But you are wrong concerning "everyone else". More accurately stated, you are referring to the sect known as "Futurists", who hardly represents the whole. I'm sorry, but there is no defense of your narrative concerning the clear and emphatic context of the whole matter. This is why you and others have nothing to say against what I just clearly shown you. It's irrefutable, if you think not, then prove these NT Writers wrong, because it's THEM your at odds with, not me.

You keep trying to prove that Preterism is wrong, and that's unfortunately all you can see, instead of what the NT Writers said, proclaimed, and believed. My Preterism believes what THEY believed and taught their original audience. You fault me for believing THEIR testimony. You think throwing the term "Preterist" around voids what THEY said. But, rather, it's the term "futurist" that should be debunked! There is ZERO futuristic thought in their teachings to THEIR original audience. Every expectation was geared to THEIR lifetime, WITHOUT any doubt whatsoever. YOU COULDN'T PROVE FUTURISM IN ANY CONVERSATION BY THE NT WRITERS BY ANY STRETCH OF YOUR IMGINATION.

Yet Peterism, holding to THEIR testimony is the view that's in question; UNREAL and lamentable!

Nevertheless, error in eschatology shouldn't affect one's salvation. If you're hope is a global destruction, as you claim Yeshua and His Apostles taught THEIR generation, well in all faithfulness, go for it!

God Bless.

[steve7150]

Ok Bro. But you are wrong concerning "everyone else". More accurately stated, you are referring to the sect known as "Futurists", who hardly represents the whole. I'm sorry, but there is no defense of your narrative concerning the clear and emphatic context of the whole matter. This is why you and others have nothing to say against what I just clearly shown you. It's irrefutable, if you think not, then prove these NT Writers wrong, because it's THEM your at odds with, not me.

You keep trying to prove that Preterism is wrong, and that's unfortunately all you can see, instead of what the NT Writers said, proclaimed, and believed. My Preterism believes what THEY believed and taught their original audience. You fault me for believing THEIR testimony. You think throwing the term










Robby,
When i said "everyone else" what i really meant was "everyone else" which includes Partial Preterists. It also includes former Preterists like Sam Frost who realized 70AD didn't include everything.
I am not throwing around the phrase "Preterist" , i use it when necessary and if you prefer something other description , let me know. You said i had nothing to say but from that response i'm not sure you even read my posts.
Lastly i'm not trying to prove Preterism wrong, i never started a thread like that but i do respond sometimes to Preterist claims because i disagree.

I don't doubt your sincerity and i don't doubt you are saved but i just disagree with the 70AD conclusions which sounds like a secret sauce type of club.

[TheEditor]

I think "Historicists" would also view matters the way "Futurists" do on this point, Robby. In fact, other than Fully Realized Eschatologists (more palatable?) I can think of no other group that views matters this way, Robby, therefore, Steve's "everyone else" is quite accurate. And, apparently by 'some stretch of the imagination' (despite your contention) people do make this conclusion, as millions have it, eh?

"Secret Sauce Club"--I like it Steve. Being an ex-JW I know a little about such clubs and sauce.

Regards, Brenden.

[robbyyoung]

You said i had nothing to say but from that response i'm not sure you even read my posts.

No, I've read your post. I was referring to my extended remarks from your post to "dizerner's", conerning the gospel being preached in all the known world being fulfilled, here it is again:

The entire context of Matt 24:14:

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

1. "The End" will come, when the gospel is preached, as a witness, in the Roman World, to all the people.
2. NO DISCIPLE or APOSTLE could say, "THE END" is near, arrived, at the door, etc... before, the gospel was preached, as a witness, to the Roman World.
3. The ONLY ones who were QUALIFIED to make this announcement were The Apostles.
4. Yeshua, emphatically gave THEM what signs to look for in Matthew 24's discourse, to seperate THEM from the FALSE PROPHETS who will make premature declarations in THEIR DAY! (Luke 21:8).
5. Therefore, Peter says in 1 Peter 4:5-7, emphasis on vs. 7, "The end of all things is near..."
6. Paul and Peter correctly read the signs and rendered the warnings to their audience in the 1st Century!

I can go on and on to destroy any claims AGAINST these inspired NT Writers by UNSPIRED MEN!

If you are so big on context, why don't you celebrate THEIR conculsion in regards to "The End"?

---------------------------------------

Therefore, prove THEM wrong.

Peter said, "The end is near". Either Peter got it right, or He's a False Prophet whom Yeshua warned about concerning giving premature declarations?????
Paul said, "the gospel was preached to all". Either Paul got it right, or he is likewise a False Prophet????

Neither one could say these things unless inspired by The Holy Spirit to do so, for in doing so, The End came.

Are you going to uphold THEIR testimony or not?

God Bless.

[robbyyoung]

I think "Historicists" would also view matters the way "Futurists" do on this point, Robby. In fact, other than Fully Realized Eschatologists (more palatable?) I can think of no other group that views matters this way, Robby, therefore, Steve's "everyone else" is quite accurate. And, apparently by 'some stretch of the imagination' (despite your contention) people do make this conclusion, as millions have it, eh?

"Secret Sauce Club"--I like it Steve. Being an ex-JW I know a little about such clubs and sauce.

Regards, Brenden.

Hi Brenden,

My Preterism hold to the belief to what Yeshua and The Apostles believed, plan and simple. If that includes ressurection, judgement, etc... so be it. I reject all claims set out to prove THEM wrong or confused.

God Bless.

[TheEditor]

Hi Robby,

I appreciate your passion. But the reality is, everyone that passionately holds to what they believe, claims as you do, namely that they "hold to the belief to what Yeshua and The Apostles believed, plan and simple". Also, though it is an effective tool of argumentation, it doesn't actually prove anything to say "I reject all claims set out to prove THEM wrong or confused." By saying this you shift the objections non-full preterists have against the viewpoints of preterists to Jesus and the Apostles...something that I for one don't believe myself to be guilty of.

Regards, Brenden.

[Homer]

Hi Robby,

You wrote;

The entire context of Matt 24:14:

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

1. "The End" will come, when the gospel is preached, as a witness, in the Roman World, to all the people.
2. NO DISCIPLE or APOSTLE could say, "THE END" is near, arrived, at the door, etc... before, the gospel was preached, as a witness, to the Roman World.

Note the not so subtle change you made, inserting your opinion instead of what was written in the scriptures. Lets you keep riding your hobbyhorse.

Why don't you show us how John Piper and N. T. Wright are in error in their explanation of the Greek in Colossians 1:23, instead of just making assertions as though they are fact. If you are able, that would be more helpful to your cause.

[robbyyoung]

Hi Robby,

You wrote;

The entire context of Matt 24:14:

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

1. "The End" will come, when the gospel is preached, as a witness, in the Roman World, to all the people.
2. NO DISCIPLE or APOSTLE could say, "THE END" is near, arrived, at the door, etc... before, the gospel was preached, as a witness, to the Roman World.

Note the not so subtle change you made, inserting your opinion instead of what was written in the scriptures. Lets you keep riding your hobbyhorse.

Why don't you show us how John Piper and N. T. Wright are in error in their explanation of the Greek in Colossians 1:23, instead of just making assertions as though they are fact. If you are able, that would be more helpful to your cause.

Hey Homer,

I don't need to insert any other opinions on the Greek. The internal evidence I gave does all the talking for me. You know, the one nobody seems to want to touch! To include you.

"Hobbyhorse?", we are in a post geared to prophecy, debating Futuristic vs. other renderings of Matt 24, and yet, I have the "hobbyhorse"??? Figures...

Now why don't you answer my above post with your very own "HOBBYHORSE"! Good grief***

God Bless.

[robbyyoung]

Hi Robby,

I appreciate your passion. But the reality is, everyone that passionately holds to what they believe, claims as you do, namely that they "hold to the belief to what Yeshua and The Apostles believed, plan and simple". Also, though it is an effective tool of argumentation, it doesn't actually prove anything to say "I reject all claims set out to prove THEM wrong or confused." By saying this you shift the objections non-full preterists have against the viewpoints of preterists to Jesus and the Apostles...something that I for one don't believe myself to be guilty of.

Regards, Brenden.

Brenden,

In the above post, is Peter and Paul using some sort of "Jedi mind trick" or something? Is it cryptic language or what?

How better can the The Holy Spirit relay the message that "The End was now near or The gospel was preach as a witness to all nations" other than what was stated above?

How in the world did that original audience hear this message?

If you are not proving their testimony, then what in God's name are you doing alternatively?

I am very interested to hear from you, dizerner, and steve7150 concerning my above text. As brothers in the Lord, show me my confusion to accept THEIR testimony as stated.

Thanks, and God Bless.