A debate on the merits of Preterism

[Matthitjah]

Grace to you,

Thoughtful has extended an offer for a debate on the merits of Preterism and Shiloh357 has accepted.

Here are the guidlines;

1) This will be a "polite" discussion. This means that neither party will engage in namecalling, ad-hominem attacks, or resort to any manner of character assassination at any point in time.

2) Time to reply will not be a consideration. However, please be considerate enough to at least try to reply in a timely manner, or otherwise concede the discussion.

3) This is not a "win/lose" discussion. The nature of a debate is to argue your points clearly and to the best of your ability. Nobody is right or wrong. Even though you may use the words "right" and "wrong" in the process of disputing a point, the purpose of debate is to get your point across, and support that point with evidence. It is up to the reader to decide who's argument is more weighty.

4) Books and online articles may be used as source material. However, those articles may be referenced in accordance with the Terms of Service. Links to inappropriate material will be removed. Material that is plagiarized will not be considered at all. At all times participants will cite their source material completely.

5) Wherever possible, please try to avoid leading the course of discussion "off track," or "off topic." In order to have a clear and concise debate it is necessary to stick to the topic until such time as the issues involved have been completely discussed and all points have been exhausted. When such a point in the discussion has been reached then other issues can be brought into the discussion and debated.

Let's pray for God's TRUTH to be revealed through this discussion.

Peace,

Dave

[Guest shiloh357]

Thanks Mattitjah!!

[Guest shiloh357]

I will leave it to you, Shiloh, to introduce a specific topic for us to debate.

Very well, I suppose to start off, why don't you expand on the following:

I believe that the prophesies reguarding the Second Coming, the Rapture, the Resurrection, and the Judgement have already happened. However, there is no mention in the Bible of the actual end of time and space. Therefore, I believe that all we as Christians are awaiting is the end of time and space, and upon that end, will be Judged according to the Word.

I would be interested in seeing from the Scriptures your line of thought and how you arrive at those above conclusions.

Thanks,

[Guest shiloh357]

In re-reading over your inital post, could I ask you to clarify what a "Moderate Preterist" is? I am familiar with both Partial and Full Preterism, but not "Moderate" Preterism. How does that differ from the other two types?

In verse 4 we see the disciples ask Jesus when these things will be fufilled, and what the signs will be. They were speaking of his comment in verse 2 about the coming destruction. It is clear that no where in this interchange were they speaking of a coming rapture.

Continuing on through the following verses, Jesus describes what he calls "the begining of birth pains." He describes things such as "wars and rumors of wars."

Here's where I see misinterpretation. Christians often switch gears and go from historical to literal. They see in verses 1-4 that Jesus was talking of the building, and then when He describes the signs, Christians often apply these signs to the times around us.

Instead we must keep it in context and continue reading it in historical terms, that Jesus was speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem.

To say that Jesus' words must remain in the context of the destruction of Jersualsm in 1st Century simply does not work when we examine the same conversation in Matthew.

Matthew records the same conversation as beginning this way:

And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to show him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? (Matthew 24:1-3)

The question the disciples asked Jesus sets the context as not only applying to the destruction of the Temple but of the signs of His coming and the end of the world. Obviously, Jesus answer cannot be limited to 70 A.D. because the world did not end in 70 A.D. The disciples' question applies to three issues

1. The Aforementioned Destruction of The Temple

2. The Sign of Jesus' Coming

3. The End of The Age

The questions of the disciples' appear in the context of what Jesus said in Matthew 23. Jesus has jsut announced the judgement of God upon the blind religious leaders in Jerusalem and then proceeds to speak about the overthrow of Jersuslam beginnning in Matthew 24:1. The question asked of the disciples was no doubt a product of Jesus declaration just moments prior in Matthew 23: 37-39:

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

(Matthew 23:37-39)

The disciples were particularly interested in Jesus' return. The coming of the Messiah to establish the Kingdom would mean the ternmination of the age and the beginning of the Messianic Kingdom on earth where the Messiah would rule from Jerusalem on the throne of David. According to the prophets, this will occur after the regathering of the scattered nation of Israel.

In verses 14-20 Jesus speaks of the abomination that causes desolation. Historically this is seen as Herod stepping into the temple and deficating in the Holiest of rooms.

Who understands it that way?

Jesus also says things like "let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 15Let no one on the roof of his house go down or enter the house to take anything out. " These verses fit within the context of the coming destruction.

Yet those verses do not limit the interpretation to events occuring only in the 1st Century. If you believe they do, I would like see how you arrive at that conclusion.

I would also point out that Bible prophecy with respect to the ends times is not limited to the Book of Revelation or Mark 13 or even the book of Daniel. Many of the OT prophets had lots to say about the end times, and they speak things did not occur in 70 A.D. and some of which have yet to come to pass completely in our day.

[Guest shiloh357]

You are correct in your wording but your understanding of it is off. I've noticed this happens when people believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God, the dictation of God's words by man. Is this your belief of the Bible?

I believe the Bible to be inerrant, meaning it is free of error. I believe the words that are present in the orginals are the words that are supposed to be there. Do I believe in an audible dictation? Not really, but then I don't think too many understand "inspiration" to work in that fashion.

So do you believe the Bible to be inerrant?

The account as described by Matthew clearly shows Jesus' disciples asking of the coming destruction of Jeruslam. You say Jesus answer cannot be limited to 70 A.D. because of the "end of the world" question by the disciples. However, in studying the writing styles of the Jews in that day, both in Biblical and non-Biblical text, it can be seen that Jewish writing incorporated the use of hyperbole in their writing. Jewish culture has a deep understanding of this use of hyperbole, the word "world" is applied when speaking of Israel. Hyperbole was used often when describing certain events, both past, present, and future, as well as describing emotion

Yes, I understand the issue about hyperbole. I know what it is.

The onus is on you, however to demonstrate your claim that hyperbole is necessarily being used int the text. Simply claiming something to be hyperbolic is insufficient. What are the textual indicators that demand the text NOT be understood in a literal fashion.

This use of hyperbole is seen throughout the Bible.

I am aware of that. However, whenever a given text employs a nonliteral literary device, there will be internal indicators in the text. You cannot judge a given text whether we are talking about the Bible or some other text by an outside text. I cannot use a newspaper from 1953 to judge the style of The Old Man and Sea, by Hemmingway. It is incorrect to assume that a word or phrase used in a hyperbolic fashion in other pieces of Jewish literature, is going to be used the same way by human authors of Scripoture. The Bible is not just another piece of Jewish literature.

Any given text is violated when we do not examine it in the light of the object the author has in view. The purpose of hermeneutics is to understand the text the way the author intended. Figurative evices must be understood in the light of the literal meaning they are employed to convey.

In Mark 13, when He describes the signs, Jesus is clearly alluding to Daniel 7 , where we see that the

[refugepsa91]

closed...

can be reopened per request of either participant....

Blessings,

Angel