The gap in the 70 weeks is not absurd

Post by **_AARONDISNEY** » Sat May 13, 2006 4:32 pm

JD wrote:Aaron,

That's fair. As Sean pointed out, dispensationalists believe there will be sacrifices in the millennium. This has many problems, but where you are concerned, you cannot say at one point that the antichrist will end sacrifices, but then, in the millennium, there will be sacrifices. Unless you are picking and choosing when to take the word "cease" literally.

That, or you believe the antichrist has powers that Jesus doesn't - ending sacrifices.

As for your other comments, if you were familiar with old testament idioms, then you would understand that Jesus is using apocalyptic language to describe impending judgment on Israel. This has been chronicled at other threads, and discarded by those who do not allow the Bible to interpret itself, but instead rely on worn-out cliches and absurd literalism.

Blessings in your quest to tell Christians what Jesus didn't accomplish at Calvary.

JD,
The fact that the sacrifices end in the midst of the 70th week does not mean that they cannot be started again. However, I am not sure at this point that it is taught that they will be started again.
But it is stated they will CEASE in the midst of the week. That means they will stop. If they start again afterwards, that is a different thing altogether. I would imagine that as Jesus reigns on earth and brings in everlasting righteousness, there should be none that would offer sacrifices since they are only a shadow of His true sacrifice.

Like I said, I have not studied it out, but I see the preterist view having to make everything symbolize something for their view to make any sense and that is not appealing to me. You can make anything mean anything. For instance as Steve went through Revelation, he said the 3 and a half years of the two witnessess must mean the 2000 years + of the Church's witness to the world. Talk about really just making it say what you want it to!!! That was a real stretch if you ask me. Symbolic interpretation can make anything mean anything. I think it is best as the dispies say to take what is being said at face value unless it is obvious you are not supposed to.

Aaron

Post by **_AARONDISNEY** » Sat May 13, 2006 4:36 pm

mattrose wrote:In my opinion it is a westernized mentality that thinks in a strict chronological manner. It seems to me that 1st century Jews group things more by subject matter than by chronology. Thus, I see the verses you quoted as describing different components of the same events. This is not a 'spiritualized' approach to the passage, it is (I believe) the best understanding of how Jesus hearers would have understood Him.

With dispensationalisms multitude of charts, I'll admit it is very hard for me not to think in terms of a rigid chronological chain of events.

I think the gathering of God's people in verse 31 simply refers to what Jesus said would happen. Now that Jerusalem and its temple were destroyed, all the scattered believers would be gathered 'in Christ'. A trumpet blast is a general symbol for the strart of something significant, it need not symbolize the exact same thing starting every time it is utilized.

I'm not buying your interpretation of it, sounds like a stretch to me but to each his own I suppose......

So are you of the opinion that there will be absolutely no Millenial reign of Christ?

If so could you or anyone that is of that opinion answer these questions that I asked earlier and will just copy to get a response (hopefully)
Ps 47:4-HE SHALL CHOOSE OUR INHERITANCE FOR US.
The saints become KINGS AND PRIESTS and reign on the earth-Rev 5:10. They reign with Jesus A THOUSAND YEARS-Rev 20:6.
1 Cor 6:2-THE SAINTS SHALL JUDGE THE WORLD.
Isa 1:26-Jesus WILL RESTORE THY JUDGES AS AT THE FIRST, AND THY COUNSELLORS AS AT THE BEGINNING.
The Scriptures indicate that the saints will be rulers over thousands, or hundreds, or fifties, or tens. They may be rulers over cities.
Lk 19:17,19-Some shall HAVE…AUTHORITY OVER TEN CITIES…or OVER FIVE CITIES.
Rev 2:26-Some will be given POWER OVER THE NATIONS.
Mt 25:21,23-And some will be a RULER OVER MANY THINGS.
What do you all suppose he is talking about. THe present state of believers? If so, I was just wondering - which cities are you guys rulers over?
Jesus hasn't given me a city to rule over yet

Post by **_mattrose** » Sat May 13, 2006 4:42 pm

I believe the 2nd coming is the beginning of eternity. No millennium in between. Revelation 20 describes a 1000 year period (a long time) in which satan will not be allowed to keep the truth from spreading. This is clearly the case since the Gospel has exploded across the planet for the past 2000 years. No other passage in the Bible talks about a 1000 year period of time.

I didn't look up the context for each of those verses, but in general, I believe those passages are talking about believers spending eternity in the new heavens and earth.

Post by **_AARONDISNEY** » Sat May 13, 2006 4:51 pm

mattrose wrote:I believe the 2nd coming is the beginning of eternity. No millennium in between. Revelation 20 describes a 1000 year period (a long time) in which satan will not be allowed to keep the truth from spreading. This is clearly the case since the Gospel has exploded across the planet for the past 2000 years. No other passage in the Bible talks about a 1000 year period of time.

I didn't look up the context for each of those verses, but in general, I believe those passages are talking about believers spending eternity in the new heavens and earth.

So why do you have to strectch 1000 years into 2000+ years. You all were accusing me of not making the 70 weeks continual and natural 490 years. If that's the case your 1000 years have ended 1000 years ago. You've doubled the 1000.

To tell you the truth alot of the verses I gave were not real convincing - I found them on another site...but a couple were

1 Cor 6:2
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
(KJV)

Rev 2:26-27
26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
(KJV)

I can't see how in the world you can spiritualize these things. Are the ones that have gone on before us up in heaven right now, ruling our conduct down here. Are they operating in judgement of us right now? and If it is to be for a thousand years (as is promised) is the man that dies 4 minutes prior to the 2nd coming and is ruling for 4 minutes still considered to be ruling 1000 years?

Post by **_mattrose** » Sat May 13, 2006 5:07 pm

I don't stretch 1000 into 2000. I take the mention of a 1000 year period in the most symbolic book of the Bible, symbolically.

Post by **_AARONDISNEY** » Sat May 13, 2006 5:15 pm

mattrose wrote:I don't stretch 1000 into 2000. I take the mention of a 1000 year period in the most symbolic book of the Bible, symbolically.

Why? Because it fits your theology, and 1000 demolishes it. Great way to look at it. I will take it literally and I think I am justified to do so in that God isn't into misleading us.

Post by **_mattrose** » Sat May 13, 2006 5:42 pm

The opposite

It didn't fit my theology. I was a dispensationalist.

I have no bias against a 1000 year period after the 2nd Coming except that I don't see any passage in the Bible predicting such a time.

I learned to take the 1000 years as symbolic for a long period of time b/c the statement is made in a symbolic paragraph of the most symbolic book in the Bible AND because I don't know of any time in Scripture where 1000 is meant in a wooden literal manner, but I know of multiple times in Scripture where it is meant to stand for 'many' or an 'entire' collection of something.

Given the use of 1000 in Scripture and the genre that Revelation was written in, it would seem misleading TO ME if God did intend to convey a 1000 year period after the 2nd Coming. If He wanted us to know about such a period, why not talk about it directly in a straight forward Epistle?

Post by **_AARONDISNEY** » Sat May 13, 2006 5:49 pm

mattrose wrote:The opposite

It didn't fit my theology. I was a dispensationalist.

I have no bias against a 1000 year period after the 2nd Coming except that I don't see any passage in the Bible predicting such a time.

I learned to take the 1000 years as symbolic for a long period of time b/c the statement is made in a symbolic paragraph of the most symbolic book in the Bible AND because I don't know of any time in Scripture where 1000 is meant in a wooden literal manner, but I know of multiple times in Scripture where it is meant to stand for 'many' or an 'entire' collection of something.

A thousand years is as a day and a day as a thousand years

A thousand years is as a watch in the night

Yes, I understand all those things, however, those things are being compared to how God views things. They are meant to convey the message that God's view is different from ours. That God operates outside the limits of time.

What all do you take figuratively in Revelation? Will there not be a literal heaven, is there not a literal throne, is there not a literal judgement or a literal crystal sea, or a literal lake of fire...You see, your interpretation is a slippery slope. 1000 years can easily be taken as literally as all the other things.

I am not really well informed on the subject of the millenium just yet and am in the process of learning about it from the correct point of view (since my little veer off the path with the Narrow Path lectures) but I will return to this to see how you can spiritualize things that are easily taken as clear literal passages.

Post by **_JD** » Sat May 13, 2006 7:04 pm

Aaron,

In my flesh, I must confess, I find it sporting to talk with people like you. It's all too easy to swipe at you, and I enjoy ridiculing (in the presence of others) the way you present your views in public. In this regard, I am a very weak person.

Right now, there are about a dozen roads I can go down with what you have presented. However, it seems that not only are you unfamiliar with your opponents' position, but you also have not come to a firm grasp of your own position. (Does anyone else here agree with my assessment?)

I am sorely tempted to jump to your aid and help you out. Believe me, I know your position better than you.

You need grace. But keep tromping all over people here, and I may fall prey to my old nature.

Stop stumbling me with cliches and poor logic.

Post by **_Allyn** » Sat May 13, 2006 8:24 pm

I agree JD

Aaron said:

I am not really well informed on the subject of the millenium just yet and am in the process of learning about it from the correct point of view

How does one learn about it from the correct point of view if that person [is really] not well informed on the subject? How does one know if that is the correct point of view? It sounds like the beginnings of a paradox to me.