This generation will not pass away until ... what happens?

[Mellontes]

Mellontes,

Thank you for your courteous reply. I'll have to do some real pondering over that 2Thes. 1 passage! I try to consider myself an objective person who surrenders himself to the word of God, and I appreciate you taking your time to address the things that you did. I'm going to need to think about some of these things and get a better grasp on what I truly believe (I think people should be able to give a reasonable defense of their views if they're going to espouse on a subject) before I feel prepared to discuss these things further with you--I feel like you got a head start on me! So, thanks again brother!

l2j

Sometimes it is much easier to discuss these things in a more private arena...I would be glad to address any specific question you might have. Just send me a message! The 2 Thessalonians passage is one that just always seems to be overlooked, even though I bring it up time and time again...Audience relevance is the key!

[Mellontes]

I believe He is now as He was before the temporary reincarnation..
Was He a man before the incarnation?
Do you have any Scripture showing us He is a man in heaven?
Although I likely have a different understanding of "flesh and blood" than you do, I believe you hold to that being human body parts. And since "flesh and blood" cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, then explain to me how He could remain flesh and blood, if a man.

Its really too bad you didn't address the main thrust of my last post - especially the Thessalonians passage. I must admit though, it surely is easier to ignore it than to deal with it. I ask you to deal with it...

Clearly you follow a different god than what the Apostle preached of,

1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus

I did address the main trust of your post, if you deny who Jesus Christ is, the balance of your view is spurious. Your theology says it all.

Conquest

Thank you for your quaint "god" reference (small letter "g") being made to me. You cannot imagine how I appreciated such a response.

This is what Jesus said, "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." (John 4:24)

Paul said this, "For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh." (Philippians 3:3)

I find that most people demand to worship God as a man and not as a Spirit. Why it is that so many wish to once again place God in such a lowly state is beyond me. He came, He conquered, and He lives forever, but not as a man. He is done with His reincarnation...

Highest blessings,

[Paidion]

Quite honestly I can't be bothered to go in this direction. Jesus said that John the Baptist came in fulfillment of Elijah "who was to come" and that's good enough for me. No more cherry picking please...

And quite honestly, I believe my question belongs not to the "cherry picking" class of questions, but rather to the "pumpkin picking" class. In other words, it's the meat of the matter. Your refusal to address it seems to suggest that you don't have an answer. You are unable to explain in what sense John the Baptist was Elijah. Yet, you see fit to question whether I believe Jesus' words, because of my suggestion that John the Baptist came in the spirit and power of Elijah, whereas the person Elijah (who never died) is still to come as one of the two witnesses of Revelation, and who will, at a future time, be killed by "the Beast".

So how is it that when you question me about my position on John the Baptist, it is of such great moment, that to you it implies that I do not believe the words of Jesus, whereas when I question you concerning how John the Baptist can be the person Elijah himself without him being a reincarnation of Elijah, I am "cherry picking"?

[Conquest]

Thank you for your quaint "god" reference (small letter "g") being made to me. You cannot imagine how I appreciated such a response.

This is what Jesus said, "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." (John 4:24)

Paul said this, "For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh." (Philippians 3:3)

I find that most people demand to worship God as a man and not as a Spirit. Why it is that so many wish to once again place God in such a lowly state is beyond me. He came, He conquered, and He lives forever, but not as a man. He is done with His reincarnation...

Highest blessings,

I would imagine you appreciated it as much as I appreciated you denying the who and what of Jesus Christ, on a Christian web-site no less. As I mentioned before, there really isn’t much value in discussing the issues of “eschatology” with you if you deny the God of the Bible. If you don't understand what God's purposed plan of redemption is all about how would you ever come to terms with any "eschatoloty"? Clearly you deny the doctrine of the Trinity.

However, in answer to your question, “Why it is that so many wish to once again place God in such a lowly state is beyond me.” It is because the Bible does,

Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

One again you claim, “He conquered, and He lives forever, but not as a man” directly contradicts what Paul who wrote, “ For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,”. Mell, I don't know you, but you need to repent.

Conquest

[Mellontes]

Once again the 2 Thessalonians passage disappears into the great void of partial preterism...

Doesn't anyone have the guts to address the audience relevance issue so clearly seen in this text? Probably not. A theological presupposition is far more important...

Bye

[psychohmike]

You are unable to explain in what sense John the Baptist was Elijah. Yet, you see fit to question whether I believe Jesus' words, because of my suggestion that John the Baptist came in the spirit and power of Elijah, whereas the person Elijah (who never died) is still to come as one of the two witnesses of Revelation, and who will, at a future time, be killed by "the Beast".

Well it definitely was future from the time that it was written. But not thousands of years away. Jesus did say that the events written in the book were "Not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand."

You see Pai...You MUST interpret this passage within the constraints of when Jesus said that it's fulfillment would take place. Otherwise we can make scripture say whatever we want it too.

Consider 2 Timothy 4:6;9 "For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure is at hand...Be diligent to come to me quickly"

Using your method of interpretation I could just as well say that Paul is still in prison...Still waiting to be poured out as a drink offering. And Timothy...He's sitting there waiting with all intention to come to Paul...Eventually. But when he does come it will be to Paul in the blink of an eye.

The time statements found and used by the authors of the Bible have to have some kind of normative meaning. Better luck next time pally. 8)

Mike

[Conquest]

Once again the 2 Thessalonians passage disappears into the great void of partial preterism...

Doesn't anyone have the guts to address the audience relevance issue so clearly seen in this text? Probably not. A theological presupposition is far more important...

Bye

Denying the who and what of Jesus Christ is considered to be "guts"?

Conquest

[Conquest]

You are unable to explain in what sense John the Baptist was Elijah. Yet, you see fit to question whether I believe Jesus' words, because of my suggestion that John the Baptist came in the spirit and power of Elijah, whereas the person Elijah (who never died) is still to come as one of the two witnesses of Revelation, and who will, at a future time, be killed by "the Beast".

Well it definitely was future from the time that it was written. But not thousands of years away. Jesus did say that the events written in the book were "Not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand."

You see Pai...You MUST interpret this passage within the constraints of when Jesus said that it's fulfillment would take place. Otherwise we can make scripture say whatever we want it too.

Consider 2 Timothy 4:6;9 "For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure is at hand...Be diligent to come to me quickly"

Using your method of interpretation I could just as well say that Paul is still in prison...Still waiting to be poured out as a drink offering. And Timothy...He's sitting there waiting with all intention to come to Paul...Eventually. But when he does come it will be to Paul in the blink of an eye.

The time statements found and used by the authors of the Bible have to have some kind of normative meaning. Better luck next time pally. 8)

Mike

Interesting point, how is it based on this "time" statement some suggest AD70 was the fullfillment of God's plan of redemption,

23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. 24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
Conquest

[psychohmike]

Interesting point, how is it based on this "time" statement some suggest AD70 was the fullfillment of God's plan of redemption,

23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. 24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
Conquest

In a typological sense of course.

Jesus was the typical fulfillment of both Moses and King David.

How long was it from the Moses' exodus to the destruction of Jericho? 40 years.

How long was it from Jesus' exodus*(see footnote below) to the destruction of Jerusalem? 40 years.

How long was King David's reign over Israel? 40 years.

When does the Bible say that Jesus began His reign...Peter tells us in Acts 2:28-39.

Now...I know you might suggest that I have a problem in that I am spirituallizing too much in trying to shoehorn Jesus' reign into my eschatological paradigm. Well...Even the futurist that interprets passages quite literally has a problem with this passage as well. Why you ask...Because the passage you quote has an end to Christ's reign, yet Revelation 11:15 has Christ reigning, "forever and ever."

And so it is my suggesting that in fulfilling what it is that Paul was speaking of in the passage you quoted above we must understand it as a typological fulfillment. I think the only defensible position to take regarding this passage is to realize that it cannot be speaking of a literal reign.

* Two men, Moses and Elijah, appeared in glorious splendor, talking with Jesus. They spoke about his departure, which he was about to bring to fulfillment at Jerusalem.(the word translated "departure" is EXODUS in the Greek.)

[Paidion]

Well it definitely was future from the time that it was written. But not thousands of years away. Jesus did say that the events written in the book were "Not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand."

You see Pai...You MUST interpret this passage within the constraints of when Jesus said that it's fulfillment would take place. Otherwise we can make scripture say whatever we want it too.

Consider 2 Timothy 4:6;9 "For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure is at hand...Be diligent to come to me quickly"


Using your method of interpretation I could just as well say that Paul is still in prison...Still waiting to be poured out as a drink offering. And Timothy...He's sitting there waiting with all intention to come to Paul...Eventually. But when he does come it will be to Paul in the blink of an eye.

The time statements found and used by the authors of the Bible have to have some kind of normative meaning.

Somehow it seems that when the Scripture speaks of some event or time being "near" it does not necessarily mean "near" in the same sense that we would use the word. For example, the following passage seems to identify Christ's second coming with "the Day of the Lord". Paul seems to be referring to what he wrote in I Thess 4, concerning the Lord coming with a shout, the dead in Christ being raised, and we who are alive at the time, being caught up together with them.

Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our assembling to meet him, we beg you, brethren, not to be quickly shaken in mind or excited, either by spirit or by word, or by letter purporting to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 RSV

Paul says "the man of lawlessness" will be revealed prior to the day of the Lord. The early Christian writers identified that man with "the Beast" (or the personal Antichrist), who will head that rebellion before Christ comes.

In any case, Christ's second coming, or "the day of the Lord" has not occurred. It is still in the future. But the Old Testament writers stated that for them the Day of the Lord was near:

Isaiah 13:6 Wail, for the day of the LORD is near; as destruction from the Almighty it will come!
Ezekiel 30:3 For the day is near, the day of the LORD is near; it will be a day of clouds, a time of doom for the nations.
Joel 1:15 Alas for the day! For the day of the LORD is near, and as destruction from the Almighty it comes.
Joel 2:1 Blow the trumpet in Zion; sound the alarm on my holy mountain! Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble, for the day of the LORD is coming, it is near.
Joel 3:14 Multitudes, multitudes, in the valley of decision! For the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision.
Obadiah 1:15 For the day of the LORD is near upon all the nations. As you have done, it shall be done to you, your deeds shall return on your own head.
Zephaniah 1:14 The great day of the LORD is near, near and hastening fast; the sound of the day of the LORD is bitter, the mighty man cries aloud there.

So if the coming of that great "day of the Lord" was "near" in the days of these OT writers, then surely it was also "near" in the days in which John wrote Revelation. But that does not force us to accept 70 A.D. as being the time of Christ's second coming or the beginning of "the day of the Lord". If He came in 70 A.D., surely someone would have noticed. Is it not more rational to believe that His coming is yet future? He Himself warned about those who would say that Christ's coming was hidden from the world in general, that He is in the desert or in the inner rooms (Matt 24:26). He said that His coming would be like the lighting (of the sun) which shines from the east to the west. (Everyone will be aware of it). John indicated that when He comes "every eye will see Him" (Rev 1:7)