I missed the rapture?

[Scott Hutchinson]

There was a coming of judgement of Christ in 70.ad but there does seem to be a final appearing of Christ and eternal rewards for the believer and a judgement of the wicked.

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by jmarkoa

I didn't know, until a few days ago, that there are actually people who believe the rapture has already taken place. Is there anyone on this forum who understands this belief?

Forgive me if asking this is way out of line, but I am interested in knowing how and when this took place. Wouldn't this mean that almost all of Revelations has already taken place? Where do people with this belief believe we are in the Bible? Do they believe there are any unfulfilled prophecy's left in the Bible?

It seems to me the saying "hindsight is 20/20" applies here. If this really did already happen, wouldn't we have the benefit of hindsight to fully explain what all the smallest details in Revelations means?

Mark

Yep, Mark, You got left behind!

The origional tribulation force is here!

Obama is the anti-Christ and we have entered the forst 3 1/2 years of unspeakable tribulation!

But.....

If you give your own blood then you might be saved!

Or....

Maybe you could go to the new temple in Jerusalem when it is built and offer up a red heifer!


or not!

[Scott Hutchinson]

AW I thought Red Heifers will bring salvation in the rebuilt temple.

[jmarkoa]

Scott,

I'm sorry, I really don't know what that means.

Is there anyone who holds this belief that can explain it well in relatively basic terms? Once you believe in this viewpoint, and agree the scriptures are correct in predicting the 70 AD event, how do you look at the historical event and say, "this, this and this scripture happened because of this, this and this event, and now we are looking forward to this event prophesied in this scripture, because it has not yet happened..."

It seems logical to me that this past event should be able to shed light on some of the things that revelations talks about. (What exactly were those four horseman?)

Surely this is not the question that brings down an entire belief system!?!

Thank you in advance for your explanations,
Mark

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by jmarkoa

Scott,

I'm sorry, I really don't know what that means.

Is there anyone who holds this belief that can explain it well in relatively basic terms? Once you believe in this viewpoint, and agree the scriptures are correct in predicting the 70 AD event, how do you look at the historical event and say, "this, this and this scripture happened because of this, this and this event, and now we are looking forward to this event prophesied in this scripture, because it has not yet happened..."

It seems logical to me that this past event should be able to shed light on some of the things that revelations talks about. (What exactly were those four horseman?)

Surely this is not the question that brings down an entire belief system!?!

Thank you in advance for your explanations,
Mark

Eschatology is the study of “last day” events. The word “preterist” simply means “past.” Consequently, Fulfilled Eschatology (also called Apostolic Full Preterism) sees all prophesied “end time” events as already fulfilled. Most of these events occurred during the 70AD siege of Jerusalem and her Temple.

The 70AD “last day” coming of Jesus is mentioned in Jesus' Mount Olivet Discourse. These synonymous accounts focus not on a future coming, but on the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD (See Mat 24:1-34; Mark 13; Luke 21; most of the Book of Revelation). The “Last Day" is a biblical expression that deals with a time period that occurred between Christ's Advent and 70AD. The term, "last day," speaks of the "last day" of physical Israel's Old worship system and covenant. Jesus returned, just as He said He would, during the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem. This return removed the Old Covenant system and firmly established Jesus' New Covenant as the Everlasting Covenant for all mankind (Jews, Samaritans, and Gentiles).

The chief function of prophecy is not to predict the future, but to bear testimony of the validity of Jesus as mankind's Messiah, and to thereby call the redeemed in Christ into harmony with Jesus' New Covenant. God promises judgment for those found rebellious to His Covenant, and He promises divine intervention to those obedient to its stipulations. Throughout the Bible this is referred to as "the curse" and "the blessing" (See Deu 28; Moses' Song in Deu 31; Lev 26; Mat 7:24-27; Gal 6:8).

I have found that none of the various views of prophecy offers the type biblical answers on eschatology like is found in Fulfilled Eschatology!

For a brief overview of Fulfilled Eschatology, see OnTime Journal: About Us – Prophecy.

If you have further questions, please let me know.

Jesus' best,
Bro. Burk

[jmarkoa]

Thank you Bro. Burk!

I will read through the prophecy.pdf later tonight. I just glanced at it and also noticed you state in your post that "The chief function of prophecy is not to predict the future...". I thought that was the exact reason for prophecy. I would even go so far as to say that in many cases, prophecy in the Bible even leads people to act in the future.

One quick example comes to mind:

Mathew 1:18-25.

First, it was prophesied to Joseph that Mary would have a boy and that happened. Second, Joseph was foretold to call his name Jesus, which he then acted upon, and did name the boy Jesus. Third, this whole process was done in this way to fulfill a previous prophecy, "Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet...".

So my conclusion:

ALL of this was indeed done to predict the future. Why? So those prophesied to would know beforehand; so they would know it was of God; so they would know what to do and how to act. Would this event have unfolded the same way and would Joseph have made the same decisions if God had not intervened by sending His angel to give foreknowledge and direction? We will never really know. But, I believe God does things for very specific reasons. The only logical conclusion that I can draw is that God did this to make sure it happened in this exact way; to fulfill a previous prophecy. I think if you look individually at all the fulfilled prophecies in the Old Testament, you will see this same theme: Tell people what will happen, so they know how to act. Why would Prophecy in the New Testament be any different?

But still, even you say that prophecy is "not to predict the future, but to bear testimony...". I assume what you mean is that once the event takes place, we can look at the prophecy and see how the event fulfilled it.

Which brings me back to my original point:

How specifically did the event fulfill the hard to understand scriptures in Revelation?

Do you believe this question is relevant? Or, do you just accept that it already happened, so there is no need to understand how the event and the prophesies matched up in 70AD?

Thanks again,
Mark Andrews

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by jmarkoa

Thank you Bro. Burk!

I will read through the prophecy.pdf later tonight. I just glanced at it and also noticed you state in your post that "The chief function of prophecy is not to predict the future...". I thought that was the exact reason for prophecy. I would even go so far as to say that in many cases, prophecy in the Bible even leads people to act in the future.

One quick example comes to mind:

Mathew 1:18-25.

First, it was prophesied to Joseph that Mary would have a boy and that happened. Second, Joseph was foretold to call his name Jesus, which he then acted upon, and did name the boy Jesus. Third, this whole process was done in this way to fulfill a previous prophecy, "Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet...".

So my conclusion:

ALL of this was indeed done to predict the future. Why? So those prophesied to would know beforehand; so they would know it was of God; so they would know what to do and how to act. Would this event have unfolded the same way and would Joseph have made the same decisions if God had not intervened by sending His angel to give foreknowledge and direction? We will never really know. But, I believe God does things for very specific reasons. The only logical conclusion that I can draw is that God did this to make sure it happened in this exact way; to fulfill a previous prophecy. I think if you look individually at all the fulfilled prophecies in the Old Testament, you will see this same theme: Tell people what will happen, so they know how to act. Why would Prophecy in the New Testament be any different?

But still, even you say that prophecy is "not to predict the future, but to bear testimony...". I assume what you mean is that once the event takes place, we can look at the prophecy and see how the event fulfilled it.

Actually, your finding is an example of what I said about prophecy's purpose. What you quoted from me is only part of what I said. Here again is my statement:

The chief function of prophecy is not to predict the future, but to bear testimony of the validity of Jesus as mankind's Messiah, and to thereby call the redeemed in Christ into harmony with Jesus' New Covenant.

The examples you gave do exactly that, they are testimonies proving the validity of Jesus' Messiahship. What must be remembered is that the Bible is written about Jesus (John 5:39). He is the reason for all written there as it all points to Him. Once we see that He did fulfill all written of Him, then those in the Church can find confidence that He is the true prophesied Savior of the world. That is what we see happening in Acts with the early church. They knew what was written, and then witnessed the fulfillment of those prophecies, which then gave them confidence in what they believed.

Originally Posted by jmarkoa

Which brings me back to my original point:

How specifically did the event fulfill the hard to understand scriptures in Revelation?

Do you believe this question is relevant? Or, do you just accept that it already happened, so there is no need to understand how the event and the prophesies matched up in 70AD?

Thanks again,
Mark Andrews

Again, read the study found at OnTime Journal and then get back to me.

Be blessed in your studies....
TKB

[Jason B]

Good to see you posting TK

Even if you are incorrect

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Jason

Good to see you posting TK

Thanks, Bro. Jason!

Originally Posted by Jason

Even if you are incorrect

The critics in Jesus' day thought the same of His teachings....

[jmarkoa]

OK, I read about the first half of the study and skimmed through the last half. I also spoke to a pastor for about an hour that held the same view. It was as if he just read the same study, almost an identical linear thought process that hinges on the strict adherence to the exact time frame of 70 weeks in Daniel 9:24.

Well, not really the exact time frame. There is an algebraic equation, one day equals one year, not mentioned in the scripture that must be applied before even beginning this study. A difficult pill to swallow when your belief hangs on the thread of a time frame needing to be exact. The scriptures also talk of a breakdown into three groups of time, seven weeks, sixty-two weeks, and one week. But for some reason, they must all be connected, with no gaps, for this study to hold together. The 70 weeks, or actually 490 years once decoded, must be an exact time and in order with no gaps, but I was never able to find in scripture where those MUST be the case; two crucial unfounded points to begin this entire way of believing.

I have also found it interesting how everyone with this belief starts with this very point. Its almost like there is a hidden wormhole in the Bible to another universe of Bible thinking. Once you've found it, you're sucked in never to return. No one ever starts their debate anywhere else. It all starts and ends with time. I have never had someone try to convince me 70 weeks absolutely positively must mean 490 years, but its absurd to think that one thousand years actually means one thousand years, all in the same attempt of understanding the actual words about time in the scriptures.

So, I think this is as far as I need to go. There are just too many assumptions and unsubstantiated statements in the first three paragraphs alone, I don't think I could ever come to the same conclusions drawn by this study. I might be wrong. Forgive me if I am.

Thank you to everyone who has taken the time to teach me this other viewpoint. This will now always be a thought in the back of my mind when doing further study. I will continue to weight it as I learn new things...

Mark