Why I Am A Futurist

[Sean]

Originally Posted by shag

So according to what you're saying, you do believe & acknowledge the belief that Matt 16:28' SEEING the son of man is NOT literally seeing him with their physical eyes, because nobody did. Is that correct? QUOTE SHAG




Check this out bro...

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. 18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. 19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. 20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. 21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.( at Pentecost)


Here is where Jesus fills them with His spirit as the above passage shows us and makes himself visible to them as a "cloven tongue as of fire" during his appearance...

Acts 2
2 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

The cloven fiery tongues were visible to them and were a MANIFESTATION of the Holy Ghost, which is Jesus Himself being manifested to them in this visible way as His kingdom began. They SAW this manifestation of Jesus(Holy Ghost) at Pentecost.


They SAW JESUS(AKA Holy Ghost) at Pentecost

man·i·fest1
ˈmanəˌfest/Submit
adjective
1.
clear or obvious to the eye or mind.
"the system's manifest failings"
synonyms: obvious, clear, plain, apparent, evident, patent, palpable, distinct, definite, blatant, overt, glaring, barefaced, explicit, transparent, conspicuous, undisguised, unmistakable, noticeable, perceptible, visible, recognizable
"his manifest lack of interest"

1manifest
adjective man·i·fest \ˈma-nə-ˌfest\
: able to be seen : clearly shown or visible

: easy to understand or recognize




I think the Judas theory is rediculous. Nvr even heard of it. Some means plural. Judas is not plural. So it doesn't work no matter how you dress it up as some a so called generalization statement. QUOTE SHAG

Some is plural, "some" is the other 11 Apostles bro.

Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Some shall not taste of death....likewise, one will taste of death.(Judas)

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by Sean

Some is plural, "some" is the other 11 Apostles bro.

Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Some shall not taste of death....likewise, one will taste of death.(Judas)

You're dissection of scripture may need adjustments.

Matt 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Matt 26:21 And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.

If "some standing here" is referring to one individual. why not just say like Jesus did in Matt 26, "one of you?"

"One" of you is limited to a single individual
"Some" standing here" includes multiple individuals.

Maybe your special dictionary has a better definition of these two words, but this is the best I can come up with.

ONE: being or amounting to a single unit or individual or entire thing, item, or object rather than two or more; a single:

SOME: of a certain unspecified number, amount, degree, etc.:

So "some" will not taste death means more than one person will in fact die before they remaining ones SEE Him coming.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Bowas

You're dissection of scripture may need adjustments.

Matt 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Matt 26:21 And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.

If "some standing here" is referring to one individual. why not just say like Jesus did in Matt 26, "one of you?"

"One" of you is limited to a single individual
"Some" standing here" includes multiple individuals.

Bowas, at Matt 26, it was TIME for Judas to betray Jesus...right then! Jesus kept things about WHO will betray Him a secret until the very hour of His betrayal. Then His disciples found out right before....NOT A YEAR OR SO PRIOR (in Matt. 16) TO HARASS JUDAS OR BEAT HIM UP DAILY AND MAYBE KILL HIM TO CHANGE PROPHECY!

Maybe your special dictionary has a better definition of these two words, but this is the best I can come up with.

ONE: being or amounting to a single unit or individual or entire thing, item, or object rather than two or more; a single:

SOME: of a certain unspecified number, amount, degree, etc.:

So "some" will not taste death means more than one person will in fact die before they remaining ones SEE Him coming.

Just imagine what would have happened to Judas or if he would have been ostracized from the group for being called a traitor, giving the disciples very much time to "investigate" him.
They were only allowed to find out "the very hour of betrayal" so prophecy could not be altered by the disciples.(just the thought of someone arresting Jesus caused Peter to slice off a mans' ear)

[Michael The Disciple]

362 posts have been written in this thread since I asked the full preterists who try hard to overthrow our faith in a future hope the question......if Christ came in 70ad WHO ARE WE?

What relevance has the writings of the Apostles concerning Jesus and his coming TO US 2000 YEARS AFTERWARDS?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

362 posts have been written in this thread since I asked the full preterists who try hard to overthrow our faith in a future hope the question......if Christ came in 70ad WHO ARE WE?

What relevance has the writings of the Apostles concerning Jesus and his coming TO US 2000 YEARS AFTERWARDS?

I am not full preterist but I know what they believe. You do have them all wrong. They believe Christ's second coming occurred then in a general resurrection of all those who died before. The resurrection was non-bodily. Souls slept until that date. When he came they rose from soul sleep and went to glory. The living saints went nowhere physically but were caught up in a spiritual ecstasy of some sort. And when each saint dies since then, there is no soul sleep but personal resurrection.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I am not full preterist but I know what they believe. You do have them all wrong. They believe Christ's second coming occurred then in a general resurrection of all those who died before. The resurrection was non-bodily. Souls slept until that date. When he came they rose from soul sleep and went to glory. The living saints went nowhere physically but were caught up in a spiritual ecstasy of some sort. And when each saint dies since then, there is no soul sleep but personal resurrection.

Ok so if they teach at Christ coming in 70ad there was a general resurrection they are teaching the exact thing as Hymanaus. The resurrection is already passed.

So they believe the resurrection happened and the dead went to Heaven but the living had some ecstasy.

Well you believe that is false and so do I. And what became of those who did not go to Heaven? I thought 50% of this doctrine was that some in the first century would not die until they saw the Lord coming in glory?

If only the dead were taken to be with Jesus in 70ad guess what that means for this doctrine? The people he said that to DID DIE. They were not TAKEN at Christs coming. They had a nice spiritual experience but had to die and not be caught up to always be with the Lord.

If the Lords coming in glory did not include them getting to be with him forever they were probably let down.

They no doubt felt they had been "left behind".

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Ok so if they teach at Christ coming in 70ad there was a general resurrection they are teaching the exact thing as Hymanaus. The resurrection is already passed.

So they believe the resurrection happened and the dead went to Heaven but the living had some ecstasy.

Well you believe that is false and so do I. And what became of those who did not go to Heaven? I thought 50% of this doctrine was that some in the first century would not die until they saw the Lord coming in glory?

If only the dead were taken to be with Jesus in 70ad guess what that means for this doctrine? The people he said that to DID DIE. They were not TAKEN at Christs coming. They had a nice spiritual experience but had to die and not be caught up to always be with the Lord.

If the Lords coming in glory did not include them getting to be with him forever they were probably let down.

They no doubt felt they had been "left behind".

Hymenaeus did not teach resurrection to come in any form.

[Sean]

See what you started Michael?....

[Sean]

The living saints went nowhere physically but were caught up in a spiritual ecstasy of some sort. QUOTE MFBLUME



Some sort of spiritual ecstacy?

Hmmmm.....

Rev 2:8 And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive; 9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. 10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

Thats what I call spiritual ecstacy, but they had to die a martyrs death to get it.

[Esaias]

In 70 AD as Titus tore down the temple all the saints worldwide got goosebumps and did a praise break... and THAT was the rapture?

lol