 |
|
|
"Procreation still takes place during this era of time because those who survived the tribulation hour enter the Millennium with human bodies. The believers upon the thrones possess resurrected bodies and do not bear children, but the others do."
-- Jack Van Impe
|
|
| |
Preterism: Looking to Revelation: Written before or after 70 A.D.?
Posted on Monday, January 29 @ 07:19:19 PST by John |
|
twospirits submitted: "Christian preterists in the body of Christ maintain that all of the New Testament books were written prior to 70 A.D., including the book of Revelation. (A note here; Personally I have come to dislike "labels and titles" used in the body of Christ. They come across as anti-brotherly and disconnected from Christ's body of which we are "all members." Just wanted to get this off my chest). In continuing, this is essential to their doctrine because of prophetic texts such as Revelation were written after 70 A.D. they could no longer assert that prophecies concerning these things seen in Revelation took place in 70 A.D. As a proof the Christian preterists maintain that "you" (ye) can and does only refer to Jesus' immediate physical audience specifically the apostles seen in the Olivet Discourse which speaks of coming prophecies. So they see the generation that "shall not pass" is the generation of the apostles.
More will be said on this further on, but here I would first like to give a list on the dates of the New Testament epistles most (not all) scholars agree to. Concluded through their research of the historical, internal and external evidence of the scriptures.
- Matthew and Mark-late 40's to early 50's A.D.
- Luke-late 50's A.D. In Acts 1-1 Luke implies that he wrote his gospel prior to writing Acts. The book of Acts ends with Paul in prison about 62 A.D.
- John-late 70's-80's A.D. Most scholars agree that John's gospel was written while John was at Ephesus in the 80's A.D. Others hold the writing to be in the late 70's A.D.
- Romans-Romans was written between 56-58 A.D. from Corinth during Paul's 3rd missionary journey.
- 1-2 Cor.-In 1 Cor. 16-8,19, Paul indicates he's writing from Ephesus. This time would be 55 A.D. where shortly after he wrote 2 Cor., making 1-2 Cor. as being written in 55-56 A.D.
- Galations and Ephesians-mid 50's A.D.
- Philippeans and Colossians-60-61 A.D.
- 1-2 Thess.-51-52 A.D.
- 1 Tim.-62-63 A.D.--2 Tim.-67 A.D.
- Titus-66-67 A.D. In May or June of 68 A.D., Paul was beheaded in Rome. Making the letters of Titus and 2 Timothy his last writings.
- Philemon-60-63 A.D.
- Hebrews-64-69 A.D.
- James-45-48 A.D.
- 1-2 Peter-64-67 A.D.
- 1-2-3 John-Most scholars date these writings in the 80-90's A.D. While others in the late 70's-90's A.D. Written during the time that John was in Ephesus, where he also wrote the gospel of John.
- Jude-early 70's-80 A.D.
- Revelation-mid 90's A.D.
Concerning the date of Revelation, among other reliable sources that could be given here, I will give some notes from "Godet's Bible Studies" that agree with other sources. There he gives internal evidence to corroberate the date of Revelation. Godet quotes: "The condition of the churches indicated in the 2nd and 3rd chapters of Revelation render the early date improbable. These churches were not founded before 55-58 A.D. Paul wrote to two of these churches, Ephesus and Colosse in the 50's and 61 A.D. Peter wrote to all the churches of that region several years later also. Paul wrote his second letter to Timothy at Ephesus in 67 A.D. shortly before his death. In these letters there is no hint of John being in that section of the world, or of the spiritual decay revealed in the letters to the angels of the churches of Ephesus, Sardis and Laodicea, yet this theory (early date) requires us to believe that not later than 68-69 A.D. John found these churches spiritually dead. The 2nd and 3rd chapters of Revelation describe a condition which could only have arisen a generation later than the date of Paul's intercourse with these churches." (End quote).
Godet goes on and notes the fact that a church organization reveals itself in the 7 churches which did not come forth until about the close of the 1st century. In each church there is one man, "the angel of the church" through whom the whole church is addressed. There is no hint of any individual enjoying a distinction like this until about the beginning of the 2nd century. He notes the expression, "The Lord's Day" does not occur in the earlier apostolitical writings. They always speak of the "first day of the week," but the writers of the 2nd century from the beginning use "the Lord's day." This term says Godet then points to a period near the beginning of the 2nd century as being the date of Revelation. He notes that the expressions in chapters 2-9 and 3-9 point to a complete seperation between the church and the Jewish synagogue. This complete seperation did not take place until the destruction of Jerusalem was completed in 70 A.D. He notes, "therefore we see by this lanquage of Rev. 2-9 and 3-9 that Revelation belongs to a later date beyond 70 A.D."
He further notes that we also know historically that the persecution of Nero was local and confined to Rome. And that death instead of banishment was the favorite method of punishment by Nero. So it is not probable that he would have "put to death" Paul and Peter and "banished" John. And there is no evidence that John as early as A.D. 68 ever visited the region of the 7 churches in Asia. On the other hand the persecution of Domitian was not local, and we know historically that he sent other Christians into exile. And we also know that the later years of John's life were in Ephesus and its regions. (End of Godet's notes).
Another reason for the late date set by scholars is from Irenaeous' works "Against Heresies," written in the mid to late 100's A.D. Irenaeous states there, "For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign." Domitian reigned from 81-96 A.D., so if John wrote near the end of his reign, that would place the writing of Revelation somewhere in the 90's A.D. and no earlier.
Christian preterists attempt to get around this interpretation "for that was seen" by asserting that it was "John" that was seen toward the end of Domitian's reign, and not John's "vision." If this be so, why would Irenaeous use the word "that" rather than "John"? Would not Irenaeous write "for John was seen" to indicate "a person" rather than "that" which speaks of a "thing" or "object"? Irenaeous' writings show us that his use of lanquage was quite adequate. It was the "vision" that John saw that Irenaeous speaks of in his writing.
Besides Revelation, as noted, many scholars hold that the gospel of John was written while John was at Ephesus in the 80's A.D. Some see it to be written in the late 70's A.D. Most scholars date the writings of John 1-2-3 as being written in the 80's-90's A.D., where thereafter Revelation was written. Jude is another book that scholars date as being written no earlier than in the 70's A.D. So we see besides Revelation we have the gospel of John, John 1-2-3 and Jude, five books that many scholars see as having been written after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. And none speak that the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. was the fulfillment of "all prophecy" spoken of in scripture by these very apostles who would complete the Inspired scriptures given by the Holy Spirit. Rather in these books, they speak of the prophecies as yet future. A final note on the claim of a pre-date A.D. 70 writing of Revelation comes from Polycarp's writings. Polycarp who was the bishop of Smyrna recorded that no church in Smyrna existed during the ministry of Paul, and we know that Paul died in May or June of A.D. 68.
Returning now to the issue noted earlier of the Christian preterists maintaining that "you" can and does only refer to Jesus' immediate physical audience specifically the apostles seen in the Olivet Discourse which speaks of coming prophecies. That the generation that "shall not pass" is the generation of the apostles. The problem here is that they fail to understand a simple principle seen in scripture with regard to prophetic passages. This bibical principle occurs in prophetic passages by which God speaks to an immediate physical audience such as the apostles or the Israelites of Moses' day for example, but is actually addressing "future unborn generations" as to their fulfillment.
This principle in scripture is seen from the very onset when Moses recieved the word of God and proclaimed it to the Israelites. The Israelites understood that the words proclaimed to them "also applied" to their children in every age, and not just "their generation." Let's take a look at a prophecy given by Moses that shows this principle of scripture writing from the very start. Deut. 18-14, "For these nations, which thou shalt possess---.(V.15) The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee* a prophet from the midst of thee,* of thy brethren---.(V.18) I will raise them up a prophet from among thy brethren,---and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. (V.19) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not harken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require of him."
Like the Olivet Discourse, there's no indication from the context or grammer that Moses is switching who his statement applies to in this passage. The "you" is applied to uniformly and is clear that this generation Moses is speaking to is the generation to whom Moses said "God will raise up unto you* a prophet." Unto who? Unto the Israelites he's speaking to, those who were about to enter the Promised Land. Its clear from Acts 3-19-26 and 7-37 that Moses' prophecy of "the prophet like himself" did not come to pass for well over 1400 years when Jesus was born and came ministering to the people of Israel.
It is this same principle of lanquage that Jesus employed in his instructions and prophecies that the Christian preterists ignore to deduce in their conclusions. So their conclusions become flawed. So when we reread such passages as Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21, we clearly see that the "you" Jesus is speaking to is defined by whichever generation would be around "when these things come to pass." It is not confined to the apostles and disciples of that day, anymore than Moses' prophecy was confined to the generation of Israelites who were his initial audience of whom the proclamation was given.
The Christian preterists give further proof that prophecy was fulfilled by 70 A.D. by turning to the historical record of Josephus. Josephus recorded the besieging of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. Even Josephus, a secular source records Jesus' "first coming", but not a "second coming" in any form as Christian preterists claim when turning to Josephus' writings. Also, where is the testimony of the believing community of that day to prove their claim? Imagine an event so significant as the return of Jesus Christ without a "single Christian writing" as a witness to it from that 1st century (70 A.D.) on. Even we record events far less significant than that in our media. All of the writings we have from the gospels to the epistles to the non-canonical works of 1st, 2nd and 3rd century ordothox Christians perpetuate a futurist perspective that the second coming of Christ, the Revelation of John and prophecies related had not yet happened in their day.
All these words on this topic are uniform, and all of them placing these events in the future, from the first of them, the apostles, the early church fathers to the last. From these early church Christian writers, from Polycarp to Ignatius who wrote after 70 A.D., all the way to Irenaeous who lived into the early 3rd century A.D. In all their teachings concerning "the beast prophecy and the second coming of Christ", not once do they mention that these things had already happened. But always place these events in the future, as did the apostles who wrote the New Testament under the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Jesus speaking of the tribulation in Matt. 24-22 says; "And except those days should be shortened there should no flesh be saved; but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened." What is meant by "flesh" in this verse, "no flesh would have been saved"? This word translated "flesh" is the Greek "sarx". The Greek is "pasa sarx" to mean "all flesh", all life, a term that refers to all humanity. The words "all flesh" are used in Matt. 24-22; Mark 13-20; Luke 3-6; John 17-2; Acts 2-17; Romans 3-20; 1 Cor. 1-29;15-39; Gal. 2-16; 1 Peter 1-24. In every case except 1 Cor. 15-39 where Paul uses the term to include animal life, the expression describes "all humans". So we see that "pasa sarx" is to mean every person, everyone with no exceptions. This expression comes from the Septuagint, the Hebrew "kol basar," to mean "all flesh." All living creatures, all men, the whole human race. So to interpret "all flesh" in Matt. 24-22 and Mark 13-20 as referring to just the Jews living in Judea in 70 A.D. as the Christian preterists do, is to limit and misuse the term's proper meaning. "All flesh" clearly describes all humanity.
In Luke 21-35, when speaking concerning "that day" given in verse 34, "that day---will come on all those who dwell on the face of the "whole earth" ( Grek, "tes ges"). Here the meaning is clear, it is the "entire earth," and not just a specific land area in the world. Looking to the parable in Matthew 13, we see here the "field" is the "world" (Greek, "kosmos"), the entire world. But Luke 4-5 uses the word "oikoumene" to mean "the whole world." In Luke 21-25, the word "earth" is "ge". In each case to mean the whole earth. So it is in Matt. 24-30, the word "earth" is "ge." In Matt. 24-26, there he uses the Greek word "earth"-"oikoumene". The context indicates that "ge" and "oikoumene" was intended to convey in the strictest sense "the entire earth." So we see the words were being used interchangeably in the same context.
Rev. 3-10 is another passage among others in the New Testament that use both "earth" (ges) and "world" (oikoumene). Here Jesus states that an "hour of temptation" was coming upon the whole world (oikoumene) to try those who dwell on the earth (ges). Using earth interchangeably with world indicate that both words were to be understood in that sense. We read in Rev. 12-9, "---Satan, which decieveth the "whole world," he was cast out into the earth (gen)---." In verse 12, a woe "for the earth (gen) and the sea, because the devil has gone down to you." Here again the word for earth is "gen," the entire earth. Using "earth" and "sea" together indicates that this speaks of the entire world which consists of the land and the sea. This is not speaking of a restricted area of earth/land neither in Jerusalem or the Roman Empire as the Christian preterist doctrines hold to. Did Satan just decieve those in the Roman Empire or the whole world? The context shows that "oikoumene" in Luke 4-5; Acts 17-31; Hebrews 1-6;2-5; Rev. 3-10;12-9 and 16-14 signifies "the whole world."
In Matt. 24-30 we read, "---all the tribes of the earth" (ge). The Greek word "ge" is to mean the entire world. When "ge" is used in the limited sense, it is used in the limited sense of land within a specified region given in the text. A few examples are: Matt. 11-24, "Land (ge) of Sodom"; John 3-22, "land (gen) of Judea." Hebrews 8-8-9, "land (ges) of Egypt"; Matt. 14-34, "land (gen) of Gennesaret"; Acts 13-17-19, "in the land (ge) of Egypt---in the land (ge) of Canaan." The contexts throughout the New Testament determined when "ge" was being used in the sense of the entire earth or a specific land area. Rev. 1-7 reads, "all the tribes of the earth" (ai phulai tes ges) will mourn because of him." Here the word "phulai" means "tribes" and "ges" means "earth", the entire world/earth.
Christian preterists maintain that the word "tribes" seen in Matt. 24-30 and Rev. 1-7 refer only to Israel, the tribes of Israel, and not the tribes of the world. The Greek word for "tribes" is "phule," the Septuagint also used "phule", but also in reference to "non-Hebriac tribes and nations." To give here a few examples: Gen. 12-3, "---and in thee shall all the tribes of the earth (phulai tes ges) be blessed." This is also seen in Gen. 28-14 when the promise was given to Jacob. "---in thee and thy seed shall all the tribes of the earth (phulai tes ges) be blessed." These tribes of the earth are seen in Ezek. 20-32, "---we will be as the nations, and as the tribes of the earth (phulai tes ges) to worship stocks and stones." So we can know that the tribes in Matt. 19-18 referred only to the twelve tribes of Israel because the text says so, but there is no such "qualifier" in Matt. 24-30 and Rev. 1-7. Just as there is no qualifier of the word "ges" (earth) with "of Judea" or "of Jerusalem" to show that Jesus meant for "ges" (earth) to refer only to the region around Jerusalem. Christian preterists then must point us to "linquistic reasons" in the context of the statement to support their claims.
Turning to the "time texts" Christian preterists point to in helping to support their doctrine. In using these references to point to Rev. 1-1,"---things which must shortly* come to pass--." Rev. 1-3, "the time is at hand* (Greek, "engus"). Rev. 3-11, "---I am coming quickly;*---." Rev. 22-6-7, "---things which must come to pass shortly*.---behold, I am coming quickly;*---." Rev. 22-10, "---the time is at hand" (engus). Rev. 22-12, "Behold, I am coming quickly;*---." Rev. 22-20, "---Yea, I am coming quickly.*" They hold these time references as teaching it requires and demands a 1st century fulfillment. The Greek word "tachu" is to mean "swiftly" or "quickly" as in speed, not as in time as they translate the word. The Greek "en tachei" is to literally mean (en) "in" (tachei) "speed." It is not to mean "soon" or "shortly" as the word is sometimes translated which indicates "time", but rather to come "in speed," swiftly, quickly. In reading Rev. 1-1, it literally and should read, "---things (the prophetic events in the book) which must "in speed" (en tachei) come to pass;---." In Rev. 22-7, it literally and should read, "Behold, I come quickly (tachu)", to mean in speed. So it is in Rev. 3-11;22-6;22-12 and 22-20. Rev. 1-3 and 22-10 use the word "engus" to mean "at hand," interchangeably with "tachu" and "en tachei." So we see by the wording used, it is not referring to something happening "soon" or "shortly" as in time. The wording rather refers to "the rate of speed" in which these series of events given in Revelation and Christ's coming would occur "when" they would come to pass.
We read in Romans 16-20, "But the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly*---." The word "shortly" used here is the Greek "tachos" which means "speed", not "shortly" as translated. It is the same word used in Rev. 1-1 and 22-6, "things that must shortly* come to pass." Where it should read, must "swiftly" or "speedily" come to pass when ever it would occur as we see in Romans 16-20. For Satan has yet to recieve his final crushing blow; even though it has been nearly 2000 years since Paul wrote that this would take place. The very last words of Jesus varifies the "tachos" meaning of the word. "Surely I come quickly (tachu, with speed,-Rev. 22-20)."
Luke 21-24 tells us that the Jews would be led away into all nations from the time of Jerusalem's fall, and Jerusalem would be trampled down "until the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled." Luke 21-25-28 goes on to say that until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, there shall be signs in the heavens and earth, and a distress of men and nations in those times. "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption ( not judgement) draweth nigh." Continuing in Luke 21-31-36, "So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily I say unto you, this generation will not pass away, till all be fulfilled." Not the generation of the 1st century, but as the context shows, the generation that shall exist when the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, as the general signs given occur in greater frequency. It is in those times of "that generation" that sees these things being fulfilled that Luke 21-34-36 speaks to. "And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it come on all them (all humans) that dwell on the face of the whole earth" (tes ges). This verse is clear, it speaks of these things coming on the entire earth, and not just a specific land area of the peoples of Jerusalem and the Roman Empire. "Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man."
In closing, the Greek word "parousia" means "presence." And the Greek word "erchomenon" is to mean "a literal presence" of a person or thing. This word "erchomenon" is seen in Matt. 24-30; Mark 13-26 and Luke 21-27, and as noted is to mean a literal presence. Every time Jesus is said to come "with clouds" in glory and power in the gospels and people "see" him, the word "erchomenon" is used. The Greek word "parousia" (coming or presence) is given in Matt. 24-3,27,37,39. Where the Greek word "erchomai" ( literal presence) is given in Matt. 24-30,42,43,44. Both words given in these verses are seen as being interchangeable. That is they speak of not only his "coming presence", but at its fulfillment his "literal all-eye seeing presence." This certainly did not happen in 70 A.D. as the Christian preterists claim. We see that these verses speak of not a 70 A.D. fulfillment, but a future fulfillment concerning these events that lead to the second coming of Christ.
Christian preterists strongly hold to textual time statements given in scripture, but not so with the 1000 years time statement of Revelation chapter 20. There they view or "spiritualize" it as representing a time frame of about 40 years from the crucifixion of Christ to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. But this is totally contrary to their view of scripture time texts they strongly hold to. The text they use in their defense of this 1000 years time text is Romans 16-20. "The God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly.*" They take this word "shortly" as a time text, but as noted, the word is "tachos" and is to mean "quickly,swiftly, speedily" when that time would come to its fulfillment."The fulfillment of the prophecy dictates the time," and not the "speed" in which it would be fulfilled.
When looking to the text of Revelation chapter 20 that speak of the 1000 years, contrary to those who would "spiritualize" this time as other than literal are in error. For the text shows it to be a clearly defined period of time of a literal numerical value. We see that there are specific events described as taking place at the beginning of the 1000 years. And there are specific events described as taking place at the end of the 1000 years of all those resurrected. Therefore it is clearly seen as a quantity of time marked with a beginning and marked with an end.
God bless, Twospirits. Website address; http//www.twospiritshendora.com. "
|
| |
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: Looking to Revelation: Written before or after 70 A.D.? (Score: 1)
 by davecollins on Monday, January 29 @ 13:49:18 PST
(User Info | Send a Message) | Dear Twospirits,
It is always refreshing to hear an opposing view that is offered in a kind and humble manner. The points that you make, have all been answered, sufficiently in the hearts of all those of us who are preterists. We have realized, as past "futurists", that the whole of scripture points to a first century fulfillment of His precious promises. In our past we offered the same examples you cite as to why preterism can't possibly be true, until we saw that the timing, and the nature pictured in the New Covenant reveals a different answer to eschatology... an answer which is quite different than recent "tradition". We have the enviable(sometimes) position, as past adherents of futurism, of understanding both sides of the issue, with the end result being our choosing to believe in the timely faithfulness of God over the hopeful suppositions of man. No offense to you, or any other brother.. God Bless as we continue to study the promises of God together. I am glad we are all part of His Kingdom and family. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Islamaphobe on Monday, January 29 @ 20:47:40 PST
- by twospirits on Tuesday, January 30 @ 08:51:35 PST
- by Islamaphobe on Tuesday, January 30 @ 10:25:20 PST
- by twospirits on Tuesday, January 30 @ 12:17:37 PST
- by psychohmike on Tuesday, January 30 @ 12:29:28 PST
- by tom-g on Tuesday, January 30 @ 06:28:17 PST
- by psychohmike on Tuesday, January 30 @ 07:33:38 PST
- by Islamaphobe on Tuesday, January 30 @ 07:49:38 PST
- by twospirits on Tuesday, January 30 @ 09:47:43 PST
- by psychohmike on Tuesday, January 30 @ 10:08:24 PST
- by twospirits on Tuesday, January 30 @ 12:32:38 PST
- by psychohmike on Tuesday, January 30 @ 13:01:49 PST
- by davecollins on Tuesday, January 30 @ 14:12:21 PST
- by tom-g on Tuesday, January 30 @ 06:32:42 PST
- by davecollins on Tuesday, January 30 @ 14:48:01 PST
- by psychohmike on Tuesday, January 30 @ 14:56:14 PST
- by psychohmike on Tuesday, January 30 @ 15:11:02 PST
- by twospirits on Tuesday, January 30 @ 08:32:43 PST
- by davecollins on Tuesday, January 30 @ 14:20:32 PST
- by twospirits on Wednesday, January 31 @ 07:33:59 PST
- by psychohmike on Wednesday, January 31 @ 09:46:08 PST
- by twospirits on Wednesday, January 31 @ 12:06:05 PST
- by psychohmike on Wednesday, January 31 @ 12:37:04 PST
- by twospirits on Thursday, February 01 @ 08:02:16 PST
- by psychohmike on Thursday, February 01 @ 10:36:34 PST
- by twospirits on Thursday, February 01 @ 13:05:42 PST
- by psychohmike on Thursday, February 01 @ 13:38:09 PST
- by twospirits on Friday, February 02 @ 06:59:29 PST
- by twospirits on Friday, February 02 @ 07:10:18 PST
- by psychohmike on Friday, February 02 @ 07:21:46 PST
- by twospirits on Friday, February 02 @ 09:16:20 PST
- by psychohmike on Friday, February 02 @ 08:26:17 PST
- by twospirits on Friday, February 02 @ 09:42:37 PST
Re: Looking to Revelation: Written before or after 70 A.D.? (Score: 1)
by tom-g on Tuesday, February 13 @ 10:59:26 PST
(User Info | Send a Message) | Dear twospirits,
I realize it is rather late in the game to be posting this comment (two weeks) and you may not even check back to read it, but it seemed necessary to me to respond. This response is to you as an individual not to the arguments contained in your article.
Unlike the first commentator that responded, I am not one of those, that he claimed was true of all Preterists, who had first been a believer in a futurist explanation of eschatology. I have from the beginning of my Christian life rejected any futurist theology for the reason that it is a contradiction to the divinely revealed truth of the Gospel of Christ.
For that reason and only that reason, I have, and continue to reject it. It is my firm belief that this must be the primary truth and first principle upon which all subsequent discussion by Christians must depend. It must be in agreement with and not contradictory to the Gospel of Christ. Specifically the Gospel that Paul preached, in which we all stand and by which we are all saved.
I, therefore, reject as false, any doctrine that is based upon the premise that Our Lord did not fulfill all that the prophets and the law spoke concerning him. I reject as false any premise that He failed to finish in His earthly ministry all of the work that his father had given Him to do. I reject as false the premise that God has a people that will be blessed and rewarded even though they have rejected his Son and are not a member of His body and a part of His Bride. I reject as false any premise that permits membership entrance into that body in any manner other than that described by the Gospel that Paul preached.
I therefore maintain that all Old Covenant eschatology was fulfilled with the shedding of His spirit on the day of Pentecost and all New Covenant eschatology was fulfilled when God, the testator of both Covenants who permitted for a generation the existence simultaneously side by side of both Covenants, finally proved the New Covenant in His Son was the truth by ending the Old and eternally establishing the New.
For my own edification to help me grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and to strengthen my ability to give a reason for the faith in which I stand, I have always appreciated any who would, as have you, set forth their understanding of the Scriptural record.
I am always ready to be corrected, reproved and instructed if those reasons are said to be according to and based upon explaining the truth of the Gospel. On the other hand I, for the same reasons, am set to reject any explanation that is unrelated to or contradictory to that truth.
It was this truth that Peter was not walking according to the truth of the Gospel that was the reason by which Paul was able to say that Peter was to be blamed and to withstand him to his face.
Tom
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by twospirits on Tuesday, February 13 @ 13:06:24 PST
| 
|
