Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

Redirectionalism

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$905.00
Goal
$1,038.00
This is the first time I am at this forum. I have an eschatology that involves an understanding of Preterism. I am not a Full-Preterist and I am not a Hyper Preterist and I am not a Partial Preterist. I am some kind of a Futurist.

The Partial Preterist and Full Preterist invention as far as I can tell infers that there is fulfillment after AD 70 with a second coming. Yet to me it seems they indirectly or directly imply that Jesus and His apostles were operating in the Old Testament age up until AD 70. That the Christian age started in AD 70. For example Gary DeMar in The Passing Away of Heaven and Earth writes: “ A similar phrase is used by the author of Hebrews: "But now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" (Hebrews 9:26). Jesus was manifested, not at the beginning, but "at the consummation of the ages." The period between A.D. 30 and 70 is, as the apostle Peter describes it, "these last times" (1 Peter 1:20). As time drew near for Jerusalem's destruction, Peter could say that "the end of all things was at hand" (4:7).” Do you see my point?

I think Preterist eschatology is very dangerous, and it can destroy a persons soteriology. When atonement is not accomplished by Christ until A.D. 70 this puts the burden on the Firstfruits to accomplished it rather than receive the application of it because of Rom 12:1, 2; 2 Tim 4:6; Phil 2:12, 17; Phil. 3:10; Gal 2:20; 2 Cor. 4:10; Col. 1:24; 1 Peter 4:13. Rather the Bible says all of what was done on earth after the cross was so that we would reflect that which was accomplished in Christ through our sanctification.

Should not the cross be our focal point for the beginning of the NT age and atonement, the end is an end when we are in heaven, this had nothing to do with AD 70 as I see it. Romans 5:11; Hebrews 1:3, 9:10, 10:11-14 shows Christ sat down after the cross not after AD 70. And if we are still marrying we are still in the first age and world that was passing away. We are not now in another dispensation after AD 70. (1 Corinthians 7:29-34.)

The *overriding theme* in the Bible shows a complete end to sanctification and sinless perfection at Christ’s coming. Christ's coming signals the completion of the church's perfection where the living meet the dead who followed Christ in a completed sanctification. (Heb. 9:28) This did not happen in any coherent way for the living in AD 70 in terms Partial Preterism leaves us with, or in any coherent way for those for our future that Partial Preterism leaves us with.
Partial Preterism says that only some of the New Testament is fulfilled in relation to the second coming, but that there is still Scripture that has yet to be fulfilled. The problem with this is that there is only one apocalypse and one second coming in the New Testament. And once you say that one thing is fulfilled then every other prophecy about the second coming follows like a chain of dominos for complete fulfillment. This is especially true when Partial Preterists like Gary DeMar and Kenneth Gentry say that there was an end of the age in AD 70. But now they will try to show that we are still living in the last days? The Christian age has no end. Only the Creeds and their Soteriology are holding them back. The Partial Preterist system does not work coherently as far as I can tell. Right?

I see no need to list all the verses that prove atonement was at the cross, these verses alone show Preterism to be clearly be in error. The Preterist arguments, and why they will not work are answered best by comparing them to Redirectionalim, a name I came up with for this view I am talking about. This means reading Hebrews 4:1, Revelation 1-3 and the rest of the Bible like it was written to you and not jumping out of the apostolic 33-70 age as Kenneth Gentry and Gary DeMar have. They say that we are in another age, right?

The Perfect Type as I see it:
As an example, in AD 66 everyone in Christ had left Jerusalem (Matt. 25:10, Rev. 18:4) and was understood to be of those who were perfected as the Bride. These were those who had made themselves ready by the sanctification available to believers in Christ (Rev. 19:7), the New Jerusalem was identified. The damned clung to that old world that still exists today, and were destroyed. Christianity was defined on that day by the Church. All these who were to be defined as the bride of Christ either died as martyrs or died a natural death, but all were understood to have ascended (1 Thess. 4:16-17) into the New Jerusalem coming down (Rev. 21:2).
Now in our generation we are faced with the same challenges, to walk unto perfection to meet the Bridegroom. It means that if we are in Christ we will be ready, not like a foolish servant. Luke 12:46 “The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.” Matthew 25:24 “Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:”. It means that the firstfruits of the church were of those who inherit the promise of eternal life, this was not the case of those in earthly Jerusalem. Christ’s coming [or your physical demise] may not be for a long time off in the future as Postmillennialists propose.
The passages of 1 Thess. 4:14-18 and 1 Cor. 15:50-51 refer to the firstfruits coming to the gates of the eternal state, inheriting the promises given to the seven churches in Revelation and at the same time having their candlestick remain. This must be something that was understood spiritually. 1 Cor. 15 and 1 Thess. 4 cannot ever be fulfilled on this earth because Paul said "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption." You have to die like Jesus did to inherit incorruption, He is the perfect type.

Inventing new reasons for the second coming:
As far as I can tell Partial Preterists are not defining the second coming because they do not follow the apostolic model. This makes them unorthodox in that regard. Instead of focusing on the apostolic age they wish to reinvent it.

Literal Fulfillment:
Acts 1:9-11 “And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.[10] And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; [11] Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” If Jesus was to come again literally in the same way He left, then Jesus accomplished nothing in the perfect plan He had for the world. The Jesus that these men of Galilee will see coming could be literal, I believe He met with them again in AD 66. However, this kind of coming and going was not the same thing as what the Holy Spirit was to accomplish by His coming to take us to perfection in Christ. Pentecost follows in the beginning of the next chapter after Acts 1:9-11. Jesus is the perfect type, and we shall only see Him in heaven in His glorified body. In the resurrection we will see Jesus again. 1 Cor. 11:26 says “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.” We have not seen Jesus arrive yet from heaven, therefore we will still eat this bread, and drink this cup. Hebrews 9:28 says “So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.” When we see Him again it will not be in a corruptible body, 1 Cor. 15:53,54. Everyone will see Jesus this “second time” without delay when they are no more in the corruptible body spoken of in 1 Cor. 15. 2 Cor [Redirectionalism]. 5:8 says “to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.” Hebrews 9:27 says “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment”



Donald Perry
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is the first time I am at this forum. I have an eschatology that involves an understanding of Preterism. I am not a Full-Preterist and I am not a Hyper Preterist and I am not a Partial Preterist. I am some kind of a Futurist.

The Partial Preterist and Full Preterist invention as far as I can tell infers that there is fulfillment after AD 70 with a second coming. Yet to me it seems they indirectly or directly imply that Jesus and His apostles were operating in the Old Testament age up until AD 70. That the Christian age started in AD 70. For example Gary DeMar in The Passing Away of Heaven and Earth writes: “ A similar phrase is used by the author of Hebrews: "But now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" (Hebrews 9:26). Jesus was manifested, not at the beginning, but "at the consummation of the ages." The period between A.D. 30 and 70 is, as the apostle Peter describes it, "these last times" (1 Peter 1:20). As time drew near for Jerusalem's destruction, Peter could say that "the end of all things was at hand" (4:7).” Do you see my point?

I think Preterist eschatology is very dangerous, and it can destroy a persons soteriology. When atonement is not accomplished by Christ until A.D. 70 this puts the burden on the Firstfruits to accomplished it rather than receive the application of it because of Rom 12:1, 2; 2 Tim 4:6; Phil 2:12, 17; Phil. 3:10; Gal 2:20; 2 Cor. 4:10; Col. 1:24; 1 Peter 4:13. Rather the Bible says all of what was done on earth after the cross was so that we would reflect that which was accomplished in Christ through our sanctification.

Should not the cross be our focal point for the beginning of the NT age and atonement, the end is an end when we are in heaven, this had nothing to do with AD 70 as I see it. Romans 5:11; Hebrews 1:3, 9:10, 10:11-14 shows Christ sat down after the cross not after AD 70. And if we are still marrying we are still in the first age and world that was passing away. We are not now in another dispensation after AD 70. (1 Corinthians 7:29-34.)

The *overriding theme* in the Bible shows a complete end to sanctification and sinless perfection at Christ’s coming. Christ's coming signals the completion of the church's perfection where the living meet the dead who followed Christ in a completed sanctification. (Heb. 9:28) This did not happen in any coherent way for the living in AD 70 in terms Partial Preterism leaves us with, or in any coherent way for those for our future that Partial Preterism leaves us with.
Partial Preterism says that only some of the New Testament is fulfilled in relation to the second coming, but that there is still Scripture that has yet to be fulfilled. The problem with this is that there is only one apocalypse and one second coming in the New Testament. And once you say that one thing is fulfilled then every other prophecy about the second coming follows like a chain of dominos for complete fulfillment. This is especially true when Partial Preterists like Gary DeMar and Kenneth Gentry say that there was an end of the age in AD 70. But now they will try to show that we are still living in the last days? The Christian age has no end. Only the Creeds and their Soteriology are holding them back. The Partial Preterist system does not work coherently as far as I can tell. Right?

I see no need to list all the verses that prove atonement was at the cross, these verses alone show Preterism to be clearly be in error. The Preterist arguments, and why they will not work are answered best by comparing them to Redirectionalim, a name I came up with for this view I am talking about. This means reading Hebrews 4:1, Revelation 1-3 and the rest of the Bible like it was written to you and not jumping out of the apostolic 33-70 age as Kenneth Gentry and Gary DeMar have. They say that we are in another age, right?

The Perfect Type as I see it:
As an example, in AD 66 everyone in Christ had left Jerusalem (Matt. 25:10, Rev. 18:4) and was understood to be of those who were perfected as the Bride. These were those who had made themselves ready by the sanctification available to believers in Christ (Rev. 19:7), the New Jerusalem was identified. The damned clung to that old world that still exists today, and were destroyed. Christianity was defined on that day by the Church. All these who were to be defined as the bride of Christ either died as martyrs or died a natural death, but all were understood to have ascended (1 Thess. 4:16-17) into the New Jerusalem coming down (Rev. 21:2).
Now in our generation we are faced with the same challenges, to walk unto perfection to meet the Bridegroom. It means that if we are in Christ we will be ready, not like a foolish servant. Luke 12:46 “The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.” Matthew 25:24 “Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:”. It means that the firstfruits of the church were of those who inherit the promise of eternal life, this was not the case of those in earthly Jerusalem. Christ’s coming [or your physical demise] may not be for a long time off in the future as Postmillennialists propose.
The passages of 1 Thess. 4:14-18 and 1 Cor. 15:50-51 refer to the firstfruits coming to the gates of the eternal state, inheriting the promises given to the seven churches in Revelation and at the same time having their candlestick remain. This must be something that was understood spiritually. 1 Cor. 15 and 1 Thess. 4 cannot ever be fulfilled on this earth because Paul said "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption." You have to die like Jesus did to inherit incorruption, He is the perfect type.

Inventing new reasons for the second coming:
As far as I can tell Partial Preterists are not defining the second coming because they do not follow the apostolic model. This makes them unorthodox in that regard. Instead of focusing on the apostolic age they wish to reinvent it.

Literal Fulfillment:
Acts 1:9-11 “And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.[10] And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; [11] Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” If Jesus was to come again literally in the same way He left, then Jesus accomplished nothing in the perfect plan He had for the world. The Jesus that these men of Galilee will see coming could be literal, I believe He met with them again in AD 66. However, this kind of coming and going was not the same thing as what the Holy Spirit was to accomplish by His coming to take us to perfection in Christ. Pentecost follows in the beginning of the next chapter after Acts 1:9-11. Jesus is the perfect type, and we shall only see Him in heaven in His glorified body. In the resurrection we will see Jesus again. 1 Cor. 11:26 says “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.” We have not seen Jesus arrive yet from heaven, therefore we will still eat this bread, and drink this cup. Hebrews 9:28 says “So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.” When we see Him again it will not be in a corruptible body, 1 Cor. 15:53,54. Everyone will see Jesus this “second time” without delay when they are no more in the corruptible body spoken of in 1 Cor. 15. 2 Cor [Redirectionalism]. 5:8 says “to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.” Hebrews 9:27 says “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment”

So this is where I am now. And if you want to read more I can email you my book [Redirectionalism] so we can talk about it. Or you can buy it on LULU dot com. I do not make money on it, I have it there because this is what I believe and I had to write it down.

Donald Perry

First welcome to the forum. Glad to have you. There are many nice, well versed Christian men on here.

I would like it if you could state your eschatology a little more clearly. Some kind of a futurist.....
I know what you are against but not what you are for.

Welcome again, blessings to you.
 
Hi Deborah,


"I would like it if you could state your eschatology a little more clearly. "


My eschatology is the same as those living from AD 33-66.
 
For me there is not yet any "have been." I have not seen Jesus yet.

For them, it was whatever Jesus told them would happen in Revelation chapters 1-3.

What do you think happened to them?
 
For me there is not yet any "have been." I have not seen Jesus yet.

For them, it was whatever Jesus told them would happen in Revelation chapters 1-3.

What do you think happened to them?

I worded that poorly.

You said "My eschatology is the same as those living from AD 33-66."

What I should have said is, what do you think their eschatology was? If you don't want to share what you believe that is fine.
 
John is writing from prison and tells one church that they will come to Christ in martyrdom. Other churches will remain if they are faithful. Those in Jerusalem, if they were watching would escape God's wrath before the second half of the tribulation when Jerusalem was surrounded by armies as told by Luke.

They needed God's direction all the way along, but it was the second 3 1/2 years which started after a certain number were martyred [according to Revelation] that God poured out His wrath on those who refused Jesus Christ and trusted in themselves that they were righteous. The Holy Spirit brought the church to be like Jesus Christ, that is the point of the New Jerusalem becoming visible from a High Mountain. God sees victory differently than we do, Jesus was not a failure because he only lived 33 years and was killed, He is our example, as well as that first generation

The fist verse in Revelation says all these things must shortly take place. And they did for them, Jesus said He was coming to every person who read His letter. Now we have an example, it is not an example for us to throw away and create some kind of new eschatology were victory depends on some other kind of definition. I believe the church will be victorious, the church will be like Christ, but I think it comes with a cost. I don't think now we are supposed to expect that we should be on easy street and just be raptured. Anyone raptured in Revelation was first martyred.

I think there is a lot of error being taught in Eschatology, but that the answer is very easy to see. We just need to read the Bible like it was written to us in AD 55.
 
Thank you for your response. I'm not sure I'm understanding all of what you are saying but I can agree with a few of them at least.
There is a new thread just started in the End Times - Preterist Discussions that you may be interested in participating in. We have a few partial preterists, at least one is amil. I haven't gotten all my ducks in a row yet. I used to be a full blown furturist, disy.
Not now. Maybe partial preterist, maybe partial furturist, lol Is there a difference?
One member is just starting to investigate other beliefs besides pre-trib, pre-mil, I think.
So please feel free to join in, it should be an interesting discussion and your views would be welcome.

It's too late tonight but I will reread your first post and look up your scripture references tomorrow.

Blessings
 
This is the first time I am at this forum. I have an eschatology that involves an understanding of Preterism. I am not a Full-Preterist and I am not a Hyper Preterist and I am not a Partial Preterist. I am some kind of a Futurist.

The Partial Preterist and Full Preterist invention as far as I can tell infers that there is fulfillment after AD 70 with a second coming. Yet to me it seems they indirectly or directly imply that Jesus and His apostles were operating in the Old Testament age up until AD 70. That the Christian age started in AD 70. For example Gary DeMar in The Passing Away of Heaven and Earth writes: “ A similar phrase is used by the author of Hebrews: "But now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" (Hebrews 9:26). Jesus was manifested, not at the beginning, but "at the consummation of the ages." The period between A.D. 30 and 70 is, as the apostle Peter describes it, "these last times" (1 Peter 1:20). As time drew near for Jerusalem's destruction, Peter could say that "the end of all things was at hand" (4:7).” Do you see my point?

I think Preterist eschatology is very dangerous, and it can destroy a persons soteriology. When atonement is not accomplished by Christ until A.D. 70 this puts the burden on the Firstfruits to accomplished it rather than receive the application of it because of Rom 12:1, 2; 2 Tim 4:6; Phil 2:12, 17; Phil. 3:10; Gal 2:20; 2 Cor. 4:10; Col. 1:24; 1 Peter 4:13. Rather the Bible says all of what was done on earth after the cross was so that we would reflect that which was accomplished in Christ through our sanctification.

Should not the cross be our focal point for the beginning of the NT age and atonement, the end is an end when we are in heaven, this had nothing to do with AD 70 as I see it. Romans 5:11; Hebrews 1:3, 9:10, 10:11-14 shows Christ sat down after the cross not after AD 70. And if we are still marrying we are still in the first age and world that was passing away. We are not now in another dispensation after AD 70. (1 Corinthians 7:29-34.)

The *overriding theme* in the Bible shows a complete end to sanctification and sinless perfection at Christ’s coming. Christ's coming signals the completion of the church's perfection where the living meet the dead who followed Christ in a completed sanctification. (Heb. 9:28) This did not happen in any coherent way for the living in AD 70 in terms Partial Preterism leaves us with, or in any coherent way for those for our future that Partial Preterism leaves us with.
Partial Preterism says that only some of the New Testament is fulfilled in relation to the second coming, but that there is still Scripture that has yet to be fulfilled. The problem with this is that there is only one apocalypse and one second coming in the New Testament. And once you say that one thing is fulfilled then every other prophecy about the second coming follows like a chain of dominos for complete fulfillment. This is especially true when Partial Preterists like Gary DeMar and Kenneth Gentry say that there was an end of the age in AD 70. But now they will try to show that we are still living in the last days? The Christian age has no end. Only the Creeds and their Soteriology are holding them back. The Partial Preterist system does not work coherently as far as I can tell. Right?

I see no need to list all the verses that prove atonement was at the cross, these verses alone show Preterism to be clearly be in error. The Preterist arguments, and why they will not work are answered best by comparing them to Redirectionalim, a name I came up with for this view I am talking about. This means reading Hebrews 4:1, Revelation 1-3 and the rest of the Bible like it was written to you and not jumping out of the apostolic 33-70 age as Kenneth Gentry and Gary DeMar have. They say that we are in another age, right?

The Perfect Type as I see it:
As an example, in AD 66 everyone in Christ had left Jerusalem (Matt. 25:10, Rev. 18:4) and was understood to be of those who were perfected as the Bride. These were those who had made themselves ready by the sanctification available to believers in Christ (Rev. 19:7), the New Jerusalem was identified. The damned clung to that old world that still exists today, and were destroyed. Christianity was defined on that day by the Church. All these who were to be defined as the bride of Christ either died as martyrs or died a natural death, but all were understood to have ascended (1 Thess. 4:16-17) into the New Jerusalem coming down (Rev. 21:2).
Now in our generation we are faced with the same challenges, to walk unto perfection to meet the Bridegroom. It means that if we are in Christ we will be ready, not like a foolish servant. Luke 12:46 “The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.” Matthew 25:24 “Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:”. It means that the firstfruits of the church were of those who inherit the promise of eternal life, this was not the case of those in earthly Jerusalem. Christ’s coming [or your physical demise] may not be for a long time off in the future as Postmillennialists propose.
The passages of 1 Thess. 4:14-18 and 1 Cor. 15:50-51 refer to the firstfruits coming to the gates of the eternal state, inheriting the promises given to the seven churches in Revelation and at the same time having their candlestick remain. This must be something that was understood spiritually. 1 Cor. 15 and 1 Thess. 4 cannot ever be fulfilled on this earth because Paul said "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption." You have to die like Jesus did to inherit incorruption, He is the perfect type.

Inventing new reasons for the second coming:
As far as I can tell Partial Preterists are not defining the second coming because they do not follow the apostolic model. This makes them unorthodox in that regard. Instead of focusing on the apostolic age they wish to reinvent it.

Literal Fulfillment:
Acts 1:9-11 “And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.[10] And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; [11] Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” If Jesus was to come again literally in the same way He left, then Jesus accomplished nothing in the perfect plan He had for the world. The Jesus that these men of Galilee will see coming could be literal, I believe He met with them again in AD 66. However, this kind of coming and going was not the same thing as what the Holy Spirit was to accomplish by His coming to take us to perfection in Christ. Pentecost follows in the beginning of the next chapter after Acts 1:9-11. Jesus is the perfect type, and we shall only see Him in heaven in His glorified body. In the resurrection we will see Jesus again. 1 Cor. 11:26 says “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.” We have not seen Jesus arrive yet from heaven, therefore we will still eat this bread, and drink this cup. Hebrews 9:28 says “So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.” When we see Him again it will not be in a corruptible body, 1 Cor. 15:53,54. Everyone will see Jesus this “second time” without delay when they are no more in the corruptible body spoken of in 1 Cor. 15. 2 Cor [Redirectionalism]. 5:8 says “to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.” Hebrews 9:27 says “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment”

So this is where I am now. And if you want to read more I can email you my book [Redirectionalism] so we can talk about it. Or you can buy it on LULU dot com. I do not make money on it, I have it there because this is what I believe and I had to write it down.

Donald Perry

Welcome to the Forum Brother.

Very refreshing to have your insights.


JLB
 
Postmillennialism vs Redirectionalism:

Kenneth Gentry has said that this word for “times or the seasons” in Acts 1:7 translated “epochs” in the NASB can refer to thousands of years. The word at best means only "proper time" or "proper season" (one could extend "proper" to be "appropriate", but not much more. Basically, "epoch(s)" is simply a bad and misleading translation.

Kenneth Gentry has also said that Revelation 20:4 “…the souls of those who had been beheaded because of [their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image …” can refer to the living and the dead in order to show Postmillennial physical progression foretold in Revelation. This is also an invention; it is not in the Greek. KAI which in this context should not be indicating a second, separate class, but a further explanation of the class previously stated, thus KAI should here be rendered epexegetically as "*even* [the souls] who had not worshiped the beast etc.

The progress in Revelation is Spiritual. The emphasis in Revelation is not on the physical progress that is demanded by Postmillennialism.
 
Last edited:
Postmillennialism vs Redirectionalism:

Kenneth Gentry has said that this word for “times or the seasons” in Acts 1:7 translated “epochs” in the NASB can refer to thousands of years. The word at best means only "proper time" or "proper season" (one could extend "proper" to be "appropriate", but not much more. Basically, "epoch(s)" is simply a bad and misleading translation.

Kenneth Gentry has also said that Revelation 20:4 “…the souls of those who had been beheaded because of [their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image …” can refer to the living and the dead in order to show Postmillennial physical progression foretold in Revelation. This is also an invention; it is not in the Greek. KAI which in this context should not be indicating a second, separate class, but a further explanation of the class previously stated, thus KAI should here be rendered epexegetically as "*even* [the souls] who had not worshiped the beast etc.

The progress in Revelation is Spiritual. The emphasis in Revelation is not on the physical progress that is demanded by Postmillennialism.

How about what The Lord Jesus said in Matthew 24?

As well as Daniel 9:24-27?


JLB
 
How about what The Lord Jesus said in Matthew 24?

As well as Daniel 9:24-27?


JLB

I think the verses you reference have to do with AD 70. Daniel 9 says "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease" The word there is not MAKE a covenant but CONFIRM a covenant. See Edward J. Young The Geneva Series of Commentaries. The devil did not already have a covenant in place for the Jews. So this is about a covenant that God was dealing with with the Jews, this is not how it is today. Today we only have Jesus Christ.


So, I agree that Matthew and Daniel here apply to that time. But I would insist that they have the same meaning and not something new. And now for this to be true I need to be talking ideologically because there is no temple in Jerusalem. And to rebuild one would be Antichrist, Hebrews chapters 6, & 10. It would have to do with men in rebellion against Jesus Christ and His Gospel. People have not changed much since that time.


If one is partial preterist they would say that AD 70 had nothing to do with the second coming, and then they make up some different eschatology for after AD 70, not an eschatology of the apostolic mindset. But the second coming is so tied in with the Scriptures that they say are fulfilled what they propose is the same as to say they can push humpty dumpty off the wall and then put him back together again. Basically all we have to prove that Jesus is coming again if we are Partial Preterists is the creeds and some spiritual ideas we will apply a double meaning to, to intend something physical. There is virtually nothing to go on except contradictions.


If one is full preterist they would say that AD 70 is the second coming. But if you do that you have to throw your salvation out the window. When Jesus comes you are not sinning anymore, this is why Hebrews 9:28 reads: "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation."


I do not say that AD 70 pertains to atonement as Preterists do misusing Hebrews 9:28. I do not think Hebrews 9:28 had to do with establishing the NT age. Hebrews 9:28 has to do with you being dead completely, no more in a corrupt body


Partial Preterist also use Hebrews 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: to prove we are in a new age after AD 70. But atonement it was manifest before this time, Christ had already sat down at the right hand of God, atonement had already been accomplished in Christ. If it was not manifest yet, it was only not yet manifest to the Jews who would not quit trusting in something else besides Jesus Christ.


I am saying something I call Redirectionalism, that it was first a second coming for them, for the firstfruits. But that now today we need to read the Bible like it was written to us and follow the example of the firstfruits. And that this second coming for us is the very same thing as whatever was said to the Seven Churches in Revelation. If you were faithful your candlestick would remain, you would have a part in the New Jerusalem. If you were not faithful you would be removed. Yet the second coming also has to do with being taken out of this world, and there is tension there that can only be removed in Christ having followed Him to the Cross and dying and then being resurrected.


When we die now I believe we are resurrected after the type given to us in Christ. If we do not have a physical body then where was Jesus without a physical body? Who saw Jesus rise from the dead? Did Jesus have a body that needed to have doors opened for Him to pass through? All these questions about the resurrection I think can be answered in Christ.
 
Donald Perry said:

I think the verses you reference have to do with AD 70. Daniel 9 says "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease" The word there is not MAKE a covenant but CONFIRM a covenant.


26 "And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; And the people of the prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

  • Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself. - 33 AD
  • And the people of the prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. - 70 AD
Verse 26 teaches that the Temple was destroyed, which history tells us occurred in 70 AD.

27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate." Daniel 9:26-27

He in verse 27 refers to the last person mentioned - "the prince who is to come".

Verse 27 shows us another Temple in which the prince who is to come, [future to 70 AD] will confirm a covenant for a 7 year period.

Clearly 70 AD could not fulfill this scripture, as it would require the destruction and rebuilding of the temple in that year.


JLB
 
the reason I like those two is that they take the lesson from matthew 24 and apply for the audience. "this is how jesus felt about that and look to ad 70 and we see what happened, don't do that because his coming back" simple easy and ya cant fail in that. ie be HOLY!
 
Back
Top