Jump to content

SovereignGraceSingles

Welcome to SovereignGraceSingles.com. Where Reformed Faith and Romance Come Together! We are the only Christian dating website for Christian Singles in the Reformed Faith worldwide. Our focus is to bring together Christian singles of all ages. Reformed single Christian men and women who wish to meet other Reformed Christian singles for spiritually, like-minded, loving relationships.
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” - Genesis 2:18
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

Meet Like Minded Believers Can two walk together except they be agreed? - Amos 3:3
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

SGS offers a "fenced" community: both for private single members and also a public Protestant forums open to Bible-believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene-derived Christian Church.
Join us now
Garrett100

What do modern Reformers think of Preterism?

Recommended Posts

Garrett100

Someone told me a lot of Reformed folk believe at least partial Preterism, which is why he didn't want to go to the Alliance conference about eschatology this year in PA. I googled it, and sure enough, people think partial Preterism is relatively common today. I also found out it was introduced by Jesuits. Personally, I think it's all a bit of a whackjob doctrine. It seems the Puritans didn't like it much, either. What are all your thoughts about the topic? I don't really know enough to make too many arguments against or for it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Lee_v.2

Hi Garrett100,

 

This is a good question!

 

I think there are some distinctions to consider to level the playing field, so to speak.  There are preterists and then there are hyper-preterists.  The distinction is helpful as one holds that Jesus has returned in some sense, while the other holds that Jesus really did return already, but we just don't see him.  And this all seems to pivot off the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.  Also, and this is important, it is related to how a person reads Revelation.  For, whatever approach is taken for Revelation tends to be how passages like Matthew 24 then are interpreted.  For instance, a person may read Revelation from a Preterist/Postmillenialist position, as the two tend to go together.  Others, and this includes myself, approach Revelation from a Idealist/Amillenialist stance.  This governs how they deal with Matthew 24.  Further distinctions go like this:  a regular preterist believes Jesus' return in some sense in AD 70 ushered in His reign and the millennial period and things are going from bad to good, thus accomplishing the annihilation of the enemies of God because of that return in power through the church; the other believes the ascension of Christ ushered in the millenial period but that there really is no "pinning" in history of any one Christological event after the ascension, that the only real thing promised or significant since the ascension is the building of Christ's visible and invisible church in local congregations, that this same Lord will return the way he departed, and that things go from bad to worse till Christ returns in the clouds to rescue his persecuted church from the enemies of God.  I expect others would nuance or differ with my thoughts here, but this is fairly close.  Again, great question.  Here are some things to check out, especially the OPC link that talks about hyper-preterism.  (I did leave out Historicists because I think history tends to make that a less viable position as time goes on.)  Peace 🙂 

 

1.  Read the Introduction to Revelation in a Reformation Study Bible... it goes over some of this

2.  Check out Dennis Johnson's "Triumph of the Lamb" and Anthony Hoekema's "The Bible and the Future"

3.  Check out the Q/A regarding Hyper-Preterism on my denomination's website (the link is below)

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
K8EMusic

I'm by no means an expert, but I've never been able to see a logical reason to accept the Preterist view. I've tried -- because I like to understand what others believe and where they're coming from -- but I just can't get there. The biggest hurdles for me are that if Christ had already returned and was already reigning, we wouldn't see the degree of wickedness we see today, which only seems to be getting worse (look at the prevalence of things like abortion, perversion, etc.). And another hurdle is God's promises to Israel being eternal -- why would God make a promise to Israel, if He'd just planned to cut them out of it entirely and replace them with a different group of people later? His promises to one group don't become null and void with the addition of another group (i.e. Israel and Gentiles).

 

I realize this topic goes much deeper than what I've touched on; but I just wanted to briefly express my belief and the two major obstacles I see with the opposing view. Someone who adheres to a Preterist view can probably shed more light on why they hold that belief.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Curly Q

Where do Premillennialists fit in?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Lee_v.2

Good question!  "Classic" Premillenialism, which has a Futurist approach to Revelation, has been around since the second century.  In summary, this view holds that things go from bad to worse, Jesus comes and binds the dragon and then begins a literal or figurative thousand year reign of peace, at the end of which the dragon leads a final revolt before he is vanquished and the general resurrection and final judgment occurs.  This view skirts the concern referred to in the original post since Classical Premill does not hold that Jesus' second coming occurred "actually" or "in some sense" at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.  "Dispensational" Premillenialism, which has been around since the 1800's, also skirts the concern mentioned in this thread.

Edited by Lee_v.2

Share this post


Link to post
Curly Q

Thank you for helping me understand your discussion. If you'll indulge me in another kind of off topic question, maybe you can help me understand premillennialism better. I always thought that from the time God cast man out of Eden it was all to be consistently bad until the literal 7 year tribulation (which has yet to occur) where Jesus comes part way down (2nd coming) from heaven (either pre-, mid-, or post-tribulation) when the dead in Christ will rise first and all Christians will be taken by Him into heaven. The first 3 and a half years of the tribulation was going to go from bad to worse. Then the second 3 and a half years were going to go from worse to unbearable. After all of that Jesus would come all the way down from heaven for the battle of Armageddon and set foot on earth to separate the sheep/goats where the unsaved would be permanently separated from God and establish a literal millennial kingdom. After the millennial kingdom, would be the final judgement and Jesus would separate any new unsaved permanently and imprison Satan and all the demons. Does the fact that this view actually answer's the question of Jerusalem in AD 70 as not a second coming in any sense... does that relate to the concern originally mentioned in this thread?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Curly Q

(oops 😮)

Edited by Curly Q

Share this post


Link to post
Lee_v.2

This is great!  I appreciate the clarification question.

 

First, there have been three historically accepted views regarding the approach to Revelation, the Second Coming, and the millenial period - at least up until the 1800's.  Those three positions, as they are described today, are:  Preterism/Postmillenialsm, Idealism/Amillenialism, and Futurism/Premillenialism.  (Full disclosure:  Again, I am leaving out the Historicist view as, over time, it really doesn't accomplish what it undertakes.  I think it can be woven into one or more of the three other views, but I don't think it stands well on its own.)  I think what you are describing, CurlyQ, is what we'd have to call the newcomer to the Evangelical party.  It is something of an oddity in that while it is Premillenial, it does not have the simpler conception of the Classic view.  Rather, it is quite complicated by its commitments to Dispensationalism, which originated with a man named John Nelson Darby and was popularized by C. I. Scofield.  In any case, we will call it Dispensational Premillenialism.  If a person is thinking of the "Left Behind" series, then that is Dispensational Premillenialism.

 

The difficulty with this view, even if it doesn't get potentially mired in the millenial period starting with the destruction of Jerusalem (vis a vis the earlier raised concern), is that it approaches the interpretation of the Bible in a novel way.  That is, it views the major "ages" (i.e. OT and NT) inversely.  Though Augustine did not invent the idea - the Bible did that - he seems to have coined the insightful and helpful phrase, "Christ is, in the Old Testament, latent... Christ is, in the New Testament, patent."  From this, and from the plain sense of Scripture itself, most Christians have adopted an orientation to the scriptures which is, "The New Testament interprets the Old Testament."  In this method of interpretation, there is not a "fortunate" movement from the shadow to the substance of the promised redemption in Christ, the promised seed of Eve who would crush the serpent's head.  No, this movement from shadow to substance appears to be intentional, the design of God himself in progressive revelation of his word and his actions.  Plus, Jesus and the Apostles use that same approach again and again to explain Christ's coming in the "fullness of time."  Given the testimony of scripture itself in this regard, that the New Testament interprets the Old Testament, It is difficult to see why it would be any different for those who want to interpret the Bible properly.

 

Well, Dispensationalism, from which came the namesake version of Premillenialism, because it holds that God abides his commitments to the nation/state/land promise/hereditary people of Israel, prioritizes the Old Testament over the New Testament, at least as an interpretive method.  Though it is perhaps the most prominent view among popular evangelicals today, it is not so in evangelical Reformed circles.  And, it's past lack of acceptance in Reformed circles is not because of its Premillenialism, but because the Dispensational interpretive method uses the Old Testament to interpret the New Testament.  This is quite a serious departure from more orthodox Biblical methods of interpretation, which are themselves based on how the Bible interprets itself.  My denomination, the OPC, will ordain a man who holds to "Regular Preterism"/Postmillenialsm, Idealism/Amillenialism, and Futurism/"Classic Premillenialism" - but will not ordain a man who holds to Dispensationalism, period.  And it really is not about the "Left Behind Series" - that is just a symptom of a root issue, which is interpreting the New Testament through the lens of the Old Testament.

 

Other issues with this view are:  1) two or more "Second Comings", 2) the teaching - though less prominently stated these days - that God/Jesus failed to accomplish the true intentions and trajectories of their will and actions in each of the past dispensations and thus they needed to formulate new plans for new dispensations, 3) a somewhat strong sense in which the will of man can thwart God's plans in Christ, 4) a clear implication that a hereditary pedigree can be the ground upon which God bases his elective and redemptive favor, and 5) it lifts Paul's use of the word "dispensation" and turns it into nine, or as many as nineteen, periods of redemptive history, even though it is clear that Paul's use of "dispensation" refers to that entire span of time which preceded Christ's First Coming, and that which follows until his Second Coming.

 

An excellent resource for seeing the logical flow and resultant difficulties of Dispensational Premillenialism may be found in the same section of Anthony Hoekema's "The Bible and The Future" or you can search for his "A Critique of Dispensational Premillennialism" on Monergism-dot-com.

 

Peace,

Lee 🙂 

Edited by Lee_v.2
  • Toast 1

Share this post


Link to post
Lee_v.2

Hi @K8EMusic  🙂  I have been thinking of what you wrote, about wanting to hear from a Preterist.  There are very likely some here on SGS who might reach out to you.  In the meantime, perhaps you could benefit from R.C. Sproul's take on the matter.  He is widely respected and is himself a Preterist.  I think a search of Ligonier Ministries will lead you to an article he posted detailing why he believes Preterism is the most correct view.  Even if some don't agree with him, his service to our Lord and the Reformed community make it a safe bet for garnering good information. 🙂 

Edited by Lee_v.2
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
K8EMusic

@Lee_v.2 Thanks! I respect R.C. Sproul and have learned a great deal from his teachings, in spite of disagreeing with some of his views. I hadn't looked into any of his eschatological writings before, so I'll have to do that. He tends to have a way of explaining things very thoughtfully.

  • Yay 1

Share this post


Link to post
Guest meatloaf

Heresy, Preterism was first expounded by the Jesuit Luis de Alcasar during the Counter Reformation. The preterist view served to bolster the Catholic Church's position against attacks by Protestants, who identified the Pope with the Anti-Christ.


The book of Revelation shows John did time travelling in the Spirit, If someone thinks eternal and transcendent SPIRIT can't carry John into future, he is just an idiot. John didn't receive the Revelation through an angel in the first century, but from an Angel who comes Just before the Last trumpet, Just before the end of this age (Rev chap 10). And those two Angels who has shown John and Judgement on whore and New Jerusalem are not the people in first century, but the Angels/messengers who gather the tares/weeds and bind them to cast in fire. after the end of this age John was carried again back and was shown about whore in 17 and 18 Chapters. 


But the things written in the book of Revelation are
about things that were present at the time John was, in the
first century, and all things that shall come to pass, one after
another, along the way until the end of this present age.
Also, the things that shall come to pass in the coming age,
and things that will be in that age that shall come after the
coming age, in which New heavens and earth were created,
as Lord said unto John, “Write the things which thou hast
seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall
be hereafter;”3 It was also said to John at the beginning of
the book, “I will show you things which must be hereafter.”4
As written, Lord Jesus himself directly showed these things
to John. The things that are from John’s time to almost end
of this age, and at the time when the end is near, John was
asked to receive the little scroll opened from a messenger
who came at that time. The things that were written in the
book of Revelation are about things that happened from that
time of John in the first century, and all the things happened
along the way until the end of this present age, and also
things that shall come to pass after the end of this age and the
things that will happen in the coming age, and things will
be in that eternal age in which new heaven and earth were
created and the extinction of the sea. But at the end of the
Sixth trumpet, and just before last trumpet, Lord Jesus will send
his angel as written in Chapter ten and that angel will show
John (for John was in Spirit carried unto our time) the things
that must shortly come to pass at that time, as also written at
the beginning of the book, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ,
which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things
which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it
by his angel unto his servant John:”5  So the words "to shew unto his servants things
which must shortly come to pass;" applies to the Generation unto whom that Angel(Rev chap 10)
was sent, even that generation in which the last trumpet will be blown. 

Edited by meatloaf

Share this post


Link to post
Guest meatloaf

I have attached a book, according to my knowledge this book has the most accurate interpretation of the Revelation and Daniel, Author interprets scripture with scripture so well, for example "seal on Forehead" he interprets forehead as Heart according to the scripture "for they will not hearken unto me: for all the house of Israel are impudent and hardhearted. 8Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy forehead strong against their foreheads. As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead:" Ezek 3
I was shocked with such an interpretation, it blown away all the myths of chip or electronic sim under skin etc. 
 

THE_GREAT_WICKEDNESS.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
davidstarcher
52 minutes ago, meatloaf said:


The book of Revelation shows John did time travelling in the Spirit, If someone thinks eternal and transcendent SPIRIT can't carry John into future, he is just an idiot. John didn't receive the Revelation through an angel in the first century, but from an Angel who comes Just before the Last trumpet, Just before the end of this age (Rev chap 10). And those two Angels who has shown John and Judgement on whore and New Jerusalem are not the people in first century, but the Angels/messengers who gather the tares/weeds and bind them to cast in fire. after the end of this age John was carried again back and was shown about whore in 17 and 18 Chapters. 

 

 There is no reference to time travel in the book of Revelation. The book is written in symbolic language as is typical of apocalyptic literature found in the rest of the Bible and therefore must be interpreted symbolically not as one physically seeing something and then reporting it on the evening news. The means he acquired the revelation it is simply stated as being sent and communicated by his angel to his bond-servant John (Rev 1:1);  no time travel physically or spiritually is required to receive such a vision.

  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Lee_v.2

Hi Meatloaf,

 

Thanks for your thoughts.  Let me add a different set of thoughts for your consideration.

 

Regarding the mark of the Beast on the hand and forehead, and other things, there are several things going on, most all of which (but not all) root Revelation's intent in the present, a present that the church will encounter throughout history:

 

1. The imagery in Revelation must have a referent the church can lay hold of... it would not point to anything to which the church could not relate and understand.

 

2. As has been ably mentioned by David in the previous post, the imagery and the thought must be interpreted from other scripture, in this case, other apocalyptic literature in the Bible

 

3. The church was largely Jewish at the time, and even Gentile converts to Christianity were quite familiar with their Jewish roots, and they would have immediately known what the reference to the mark of the Beast meant, because the verse tells them to "calculate" it... without computers in some far off future 🙂 :  "Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name.  This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666."  Revelation 13:16-18

 

4. Next, the mark of the beast on the hand and forehead would have immediately struck the early church as a counterfeit of the Shema, which is the highest oath of allegiance to Yahweh a Jew can voice, and is/was, in fact, commanded to invoke:  “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.  And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart.  You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise.  You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.  You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates."  (Deuteronomy 6:4-9)  Thus, the Bests's mark (as opposed to the Holy Spirit's "seal") is a way of indicating the mind and actions (i.e. faith and life) of the unbeliever are devoted to the Spirit of the Age, especially to those leaders who hate Christ and his people and use political and military power to silence the gospel.  The early church receiving the Revelation of John would immediately know what was being referred to and, in fact, they were told to figure it out!  But, how?

 

5. In the first century, scholars and historians believe there was an alphanumeric code of assigning a numerical value to a name, and that system was called Gematria.  In this case, the number 666 was "calculated" by Jews to mean "Nero Kaiser" - the current Beast assailing the church, who is in a long line of Beasts and who would not be the last (though Nero holds a particularly stark and evil place in the lineage.)

 

6. All the above falls in line with John's other writings about anti-Christs that were there in his time and which would come later.  "Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour."  1 John 2:18

 

Ultimately, what is in Revelation (and all of Scripture) is intended to speak to the church in that day without it being cloaked in mystery for some future decoding or, may I suggest, not even time travel.

 

If it speaks of a future, and it does, then it is best to understand the escalating and recapitulating features of Revelation as bearing that burden.  As well, given Nero's likely responsibility for Paul's death, the church would have then already had some sense of what Paul was getting at when he spoke of the "Man of Lawlessness" - an Ultimate Nero, so to speak, at the end of this age.  So, there, in Paul's letter, we do see a peek at the future, but it is still modified and controlled not only by his own thought, but also by the concept of escalation and recapitulation found in other Scripture.  In this case, Revelation regulates and confirms the best understanding of Paul's "Man of Lawlessness" for a church who thought the Resurrection had already occurred.  Paul wanted them to know that the end would be marked by a particularly evil man who was to come, but had not come, yet.  (See Paul's letters to the Thessalonians, esp 2 Thessalonians 2:3-10)

 

Ultimately, Revelation - the letter from John, as well as all Scripture, is meant to comfort and encourage a church that is terrorized by the enemies of God, within and without.  The One who stands among the lampstands is also the One who has ascended to the throne at the right hand of God, the Lamb that was slain but still lives.  And He is aware of our trials and persecutions, and will by no means let our suffering for his Name go unnoticed and unavenged.  Nero is nothing to God, and so we can stand strong, even though Nero (and other "Neros") are waging war against Christ and the children of the Living God.  And for that, God writes to us that all this is known to Him, that we must take courage in the fact that The Lamb is in control, it has always been this way, but that we will see those enemies destroyed in the end:  “... I [John] saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. They called out in a loud voice, “How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?” Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the full number of their fellow servants, their brothers and sisters, were killed just as they had been." (Revelation 6:9-11).

 

Given all this, we press on in the face of every enemy of God in whatever age, and yet we still cry, Come Lord Jesus... Come Quickly!

 

Peace,

Lee 🙂 

Edited by Lee_v.2

Share this post


Link to post
Guest meatloaf

@davidstarcher  Scripture plainly tells us John saw what happend at the end of the Age, it shows us the angels who participated in the Harvest at the end of the age talked with him Rev 17:1, after the harvest of tares, John was carried in the Spirit back to the darkages when Church at Rome sat on these westren nations of Barbarian Beast of Germanic tribes. And he also saw Martin Luther one of the Messanger of God, who came with great authority and his Glory has lightened the Christendom, he came from Jerusalem above and spoke against the whore to all those nations(denominations and sects) that dwell in Christendom called earth Rev 18:1
And one of Angels/messangers who will participate in the Harvest has shown John the new Jerusalem Rev 21:9
The Angels/messangers who do harvest work at the end of the age(Matt 13:36)  are literal people and John meet with them and he also fell to worship them, but he prevented from doing that. 
 

@Lee_v.2  Read the second section of this Book, everything about the Mystery of Iniquity/Beast was explained clearly 

THE_GREAT_WICKEDNESS.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
davidstarcher
52 minutes ago, meatloaf said:

@davidstarcher  Scripture plainly tells us John saw what happend at the end of the Age, it shows us the angels who participated in the Harvest at the end of the age talked with him Rev 17:1, after the harvest of tares, John was carried in the Spirit back to the darkages when Church at Rome sat on these westren nations of Barbarian Beast of Germanic tribes. And he also saw Martin Luther one of the Messanger of God, who came with great authority and his Glory has lightened the Christendom, he came from Jerusalem above and spoke against the whore to all those nations(denominations and sects) that dwell in Christendom called earth Rev 18:1
And one of Angels/messangers who will participate in the Harvest has shown John the new Jerusalem Rev 21:9
The Angels/messangers who do harvest work at the end of the age(Matt 13:36)  are literal people and John meet with them and he also fell to worship them, but he prevented from doing that. 
 

@Lee_v.2  Read the second section of this Book, everything about the Mystery of Iniquity/Beast was explained clearly 

THE_GREAT_WICKEDNESS.pdf 1.1 MB · 0 downloads

You have not even tried to address my objection or demonstrate the claims you are making from scripture.You are clearly adding to scripture and you need to repent of it. I have nothing more to say to you on this topic.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest meatloaf

@davidstarcher  I have answered, but you haven't understood, your objections are baseless and were against the clear scriptures, 
Just tell according to the verse you quoted, "The means he acquired the revelation it is simply stated as being sent and communicated by his angel to his bond-servant John (Rev 1:1); "

1. where and when that Angel meet John according to the Book Revelation? 
2.Can you prove that Angel is not the same Angel mentioned in Chapter 10 of Revelation?
 

Share this post


Link to post
K8EMusic

@meatloaf  I don't see any Biblical evidence supporting the claim that John time-traveled. I also don't see anywhere in Scripture where prophecies were given via time-travel -- but maybe I'm just misunderstanding what you mean by that phrase. Are you suggesting that John literally traveled to the future and witnessed these things in-person? My understanding is that the prophecies of Scripture were more an internal revelation given by God, rather than God transporting a person to the future.

 

What evidence do you have to support your claim that John saw Martin Luther? Revelation says that he saw an angel or a messenger, but I think to give a name to the angels/messengers is impossible to do credibly, as there isn't enough detail given to reliably identify who John saw (if they were even living humans at all).

  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Guest meatloaf

@K8EMusic 

Yes, John was in the Spirit, literally traveled to the future and witnessed these things in-person (whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows), The three Angels/messengers with whom John communicated are real human beings, yes Rev 14:8; and Rev 18:1-3; are about the Luther, and he is the first one who cried mightily about the “Wine of the wrath of the fornication”, for their fornication with the works gospel ie.., Law, has produced wrath in their conscience, and this wrath produced in their conscience by the Law has then produced a superstitious teaching/wine, which church at Rome made all sects and denominations of the Christendom to drink. Verily her teachings of appeasement, extra merit works are the result of wrath produced in them by the law because they fornicate themselves with another gospel and another Christ. It is his glory, (for he brought the article of Justification into light) has lightened the Christendom, as if morning broke upon the Christendom in Europe.

 

Yes those who reap the field of wheat and tares(Matt 13), are Human Angels/messengers. Know this mystery, you the wheat who were scattered among all denominations and sects, and holding their various teachings and beliefs, you will not be gathered Physically unto Christ first(for your hearts are far from him), but first, they will gather your heart, mind, and soul, spiritually, doctrinally in truth and knowledge unto Christ, into his fellowship and presence first, After that, at time in those days God will wipe away all tears, he will swallow up death, you bodies will be redeemed and dead will raise and all of his saints will go to Christ physically.

Edited by meatloaf

Share this post


Link to post
Guest meatloaf

Yes, John was in the Spirit, literally traveled to the future and witnessed these things in-person(but he is in Spirit(Not in the body), It might have been like a vision to him),  even John seeing the literal things can't make him to understand, for example when he saw the whore in her luxury and sat as queen and rulled on countries of Europe, got drunken by the blood of saints, John marvelled didn't understand what these things are in relation to prophesy Rev 17:6-7, so angel explained John that this what Daniel wrote in the 11th chapter is book, about the Beast and the Apostates, also writtern that this Northern kingdom, i.e., empire of Barbarians make them rule over many. The three Angels/messengers with whom John communicated are real human beings, yes Rev 14:8; and Rev 18:1-3; are about the Luther, and he is the only one precisely cried mightily about the “Wine of the wrath of her fornication”, for their fornication with the works gospel ie.., Law, has produced wrath in their conscience, and this wrath produced in their conscience by the Law has then produced a superstitious teaching/wine, which church at Rome made all sects and denominations of the Christendom to drink. Verily her teachings of appeasement, extra merit works are the result of wrath produced in them by the law because they fornicate themselves with another gospel and another Christ. It is his glory, (for he brought the article of Justification into light) has lightened the Christendom, as if morning broke upon the Christendom in Europe.

 

Yes those who reap the field of wheat and tares(Matt 13), are Human Angels/messengers. Know this mystery, you the wheat who were scattered among all denominations and sects, and holding their various teachings and beliefs, you will not be gathered Physically unto Christ first(for your hearts are far from him), but first, they will gather your heart, mind, and soul, spiritually, doctrinally in truth and knowledge unto Christ, into his fellowship and presence first, After that, at time in those days God will wipe away all tears, he will swallow up death, you bodies will be redeemed and dead will raise and all of his saints will go to Christ physically.

Section02.pdf

Edited by meatloaf

Share this post


Link to post
Lee_v.2

Hi Meatloaf, thanks for sharing.

 

I do agree with your point about a "future" in Revelation, and I don't believe anybody else is disagreeing with that basic idea, for the angel clearly says John will be shown "...what must take place after this."  (Revelation 4:1)  That tone set by the verse does not, however, make Literalism a shoo-in that compels the book's text and imagery to be entirely set in the future.

 

Beyond that, I think what I am reading in your comments is the result of a commitment to a way of viewing Revelation which is kinda difficult, and hard to back out of when its inconsistencies are called into question.  Generally, it is called the Historicist view, and it undertakes the task of assigning elements of Revelation to specific events in history.  For instance, it might make the Catholic Church the unique, sole referent for some imagery in Revelation.  Not a few Reformers believed this to be the case.  For many today, it might be held in a more qualified sense, and actually be considered quasi-Idealist, perhaps acknowledging that Revelation's images might represent several instances of a category at different points in history; that is, an image could stand for several false religious movements throughout the current age (i.e. Islam and the Catholic Church).  However, I don't think that is what you are doing.  I think of your approach as a very literal Historicism.

 

I think this is problematic for, at a minimum, three reasons:

 

First, what to do when a person sees in history another fitting referent.  What then?  Do you admit that maybe there are two Catholic Churches in mind, or two Martin Luthers?  Or, might one be forced to abandon their literal-Historicism and become an Idealist and accept that recapitulating themes are being presented in Revelation?  (That last option would not be bad. 🙂 )

 

The second problem is uniquely disconcerting, because exalting Martin Luther, or any man, like that seems far afield from what our Lord would allow.  I am convinced by the testimony of Scripture that the Bible never intends to highlight in its pages any other individual human's work on behalf of Christ and his church beyond the Apostles.  In Revelation, an angel is an angel, not Martin Luther, nor any man - unless one wants to count the one or two occasions where it appears the angel might actually be Jesus (who is not an angel, obviously).  Commentators argue this last point, but never go beyond it to conclude the angel is a religious figure like Martin Luther.  As a further example, while some Reformers were quick to make the Catholic Church a referent for imagery in Revelation (and then supposed the Kingdom of God would be established on earth via the Reformed Church), it has become something of a hollow assertion now that most Reformed churches begun in those days are currently more apostate than the Catholic Church ever was.  (Thus, the risk of literal-Historicism, when your bad guy becomes better than your good guy.)  But, it seems to me, what the Reformers of that day would have never done is exalt an extra-Biblical, post-Apostolic man to be a referent of any kind in Revelation, let alone a particular subject of redemptive prophecy.  That kinda looks like a mystical form of saint-veneration, which is idolatrous given that the venerated figure is supposed to have been in a vision in Holy Scripture.  This is dangerous to faith, my friend.  You should reconsider this assertion of yours.

 

Third, this approach defies the book's intent to speak to the church in all ages with imagery that can be grasped by contemporary listeners of John's day, and of each generation since.

 

(I am not sure where the time travel comes in.  While even some mainstream Dispensationalists have quite colorful elements in their take on Revelation and the End Times, I don't believe I know of any that suggest John was traveling through time.  Without a better understanding, I would say that your suggestion fits with a hyper-literalism that is very novel; that is, because some of the events of Revelation happen in the future, it is not possible to see them in a vision.  Rather, they can only be seen in their day.  Hence, the necessity for time travel.  Okay, that makes sense in a way.  Yet, given this approach, we would have to believe that our risen Lord actually has a real sword coming out of his mouth, and that sometimes He enters the Throne Room as a lamb walking around with its throat slashed.  I don't believe that approach works, especially when we see that Daniel's writings, which are in the same genre and use similar imagery as Revelation, never indicate even a hint of such literalism... and we already know how Daniel gets interpreted.)

 

I would like to end this by suggesting very strongly that you get something like a Reformation Study Bible and read it for its even and clear approach to Revelation and how that book speaks to Christ's church.  I think you will find the commentary to be helpful in understanding Revelation in a way that is more fruitful and faithful to the book's own tenor.  For a commentary that interacts more exhaustively with Revelation, I encourage you to get Dennis Johnson's, "The Triumph of The Lamb" - available just about anywhere.

 

Peace,

Lee

Edited by Lee_v.2
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Garrett100

Lee_V.2,     What's you source for a number language known by the Jews? That seems a little far fetched to me. I'd like to know a historical fact as an actual fact before building it in. Otherwise, it just looks convenient. Also, my understanding is that even the Prophets had no idea what they wrote down so why would you be able to assume an Apostle knows and expects the readers of his day to know anything about anything in regards to Revelation? Couldn't that be something he's saying to the church in the last hour who is actually experiencing it, able to understand, and needs the help? Things should be a lot more clear when we get there, right? Is that super Dispensational? It seems Preterism/Postmil is the only one that doesn't revolve heavily on time after the temple destruction, besides consistency in bettering the world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Lee_v.2

Garret,

 

Thanks for the excellent question!  I am glad to be held accountable to provide some references to accepted sources which support my comments about Gematria and Revelation.  Now, please hear me say that I am not going to stand and die upon this issue 🙂  I know it is a lesser point being made in Revelation.  My fundamental conviction is that the Holy Spirit through Revelation is speaking to us about the rule of Christ over all history for our reassurance, comfort, and encouragement, and for the sake of God’s glory and the salvation of our Lord’s Bride, the church.

 

Here are my sources (I own copies of all of these):

 

- The Triumph of the Lamb: A Commentary on Revelation, Dennis E. Johnson

- The Reformation Study Bible (commentary), R. C. Sproul – General Editor; New Testament editor/contributors:  Moises Silva/various

- NIV Zondervan Study Bible (commentary), D. A. Carson – General Editor; New Testament editor/contributor:  Douglas J. Moo/Brian J. Tabb

Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible (commentary), Richard L. Pratt – General Editor; New Testament editors/contributors:  Vern S. Poythress, Gregory K. Beale/various

Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: New Testament XII - Revelation, Thomas Oden – General Editor; Revelation editor/contributor:  William C. Weinrich

 

The most significant source is Dennis Johnson’s, Triumph of the Lamb.  I have included an excerpt below from his book which speaks about the number/name of the Beast at the end of Revelation, chapter 13.  You will notice that Dennis Johnson mentions Gematria is used in other texts of the period.

 

The sources listed next are good, modern Study Bible commentaries that mention Gematria in a casual way, as if it is an accepted way (even if not the only way) of interpreting the gist of the attention John gives to the number/name of the Beast.  The Reformation Study Bible is actually a pared down version of the Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible.  Though the commentary of the former is essentially the same as the latter, I have included both because the commentary of the latter is not insubstantial in its extra details.

 

The final source listed, which is the Ancient Christian Commentary (ACC) series from InterVarsity Press, is a standout source because its writers are from the first few centuries after the Apostolic Period.  It is surprising, however, that none of the cited writers commenting on Revelation 13:18 say anything about Hebrew Gematria.  Some do present various solutions for the name or a characteristic of the Beast using a numbering/lettering scheme, but the writers all use Greek in their formulations.  It is almost as if they had no access to any Hebrew or Jewish writings or traditions which might have revealed Gematria to them.  My reason for listing the ACC source is to suggest that perhaps later manuscript, archaeological, and historical research uncovered more about Hebrew Gematria than was available to those early church writers, and this perhaps accounts for the casual, accepting tone found in the selected modern sources I provide.  Again, I refer you to Dennis Johnson's reference to Gematria in other ancient texts.

 

Thanks again for requesting more information!

Lee 🙂 

 

 

beast_1.jpg

beast_2.jpg

beast_3.jpg

Edited by Lee_v.2

Share this post


Link to post
Garrett100

Thanks for all your effort, I appreciate it, as well as everyone else's input very much! I'm sorry if my last comment looked more aggressive than it was intended.

  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Lee_v.2

Hi Garrett, no need to apologize. 🙂  You put the right amount of challenge and the mandate for faithfulness to Scripture and reason in your previous comment.  I am grateful!  Btw, I actually don't mention very often some of the stuff I wrote here because in the circles in which I run those things don't come up much.  However, with the man who was posting earlier, it seemed a way of perhaps establishing a tiny bit of common ground by capitalizing on his fascination with Revelation's imagery and secret meanings.  Who knows, perhaps years down the road, that gentleman may come around to a more orthodox view.

 

I do hope you are finding a way forward with your research into and understanding of Preterism.  I appreciate your introduction to the topic and all your contributions throughout.

 

Peace,

Lee

 

p.s. if the woman of your dreams is a Preterist, I think you will have found another value to your explorations here. 🙂 

 

Edited by Lee_v.2

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...
Articles - News