Why I Am A Futurist

[mfblume]

MTD, I am somewhat amazed you never really delved into the 70 weeks of Daniel issue and yet you hold strong opinions of prophecy. The 70 weeks of Daniel is a pivotal and monumental issue in all of prophecy, no matter which persuasion we stand by.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by mfblume

MTD, I am somewhat amazed you never really delved into the 70 weeks of Daniel issue and yet you hold strong opinions of prophecy. The 70 weeks of Daniel is a pivotal and monumental issue in all of prophecy, no matter which persuasion we stand by.

Well I looked at a few of the articles online and it reminded me of why I quit studying it years ago. After reconsidering Daniel 11 I admit that IF the history is true it would be the fulfillment of the prophecy. The big problem of course is the resurrection did not take place.

As to the post trib doctrine it can stand without perfect understanding of the 70 weeks. Its like with the Godhead. One need not understand everything about it to believe its true.

[mfblume]

It's just that the 70 weeks is the only actual span of exact years in all bible prophecy. It's integral.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Here's my thoughts, since I looked and looked and could not find any grounds for a material kingdom for Israel. Jesus simply said that's not possible when he stated the kingdom doesn't come with observation. In fact, the disciples asked Jesus when He would restore again the kingdom to Israel. For one thing, Jesus never said anything about such a concept. in his teachings. It was a popular belief among Jews in that day, but neither the Lord nor apostles ever taught it. Jesus redirected them to the kingdom of the Holy GHost in them. After that, when they received the Spirit, no one ever spoke of it again.

Jesus said the Holy Ghost would guide them into truths He was unable to teach them during His time on earth, for they couldn't bear them. I think this Spiritual kingdom was one of those elements.

ALso, Jesus taught about the kingdom during the 40 days after His resurrection. If He taught them about the Kingdom, and they had to ask about an earthly Israelite kingdom, He obviously said nothing about that earthly idea.



Amen.



The rapture is AT the second coming, according to 1 C or 15.

Also, the church is Jew and Gentile in one body reconciled to God by the cross. The "gentile church" idea is utter nonsense.

Regarding dual fulfillment, we see dozens of dual fulfillments with one occurrence before the cross and the second after. Never were there two occurrences of both fulfilments after the cross. This is because type and antitype are involved with the type before the cross and the antitype after.

AGain, I simply think the only reason people consider duality is in trying to hang onto futurism. But when you look at the passages themselves why would anyone think there would be a dual fulfillment?

As I stated earlier, if one tribulation is A.D. 70 and the second in the future then the one in A.D. 70 could have nothing occur later that is as great. And the on in the future could not have any in the past that is greater. As soon as Jesus said none greater before or after, the dual idea cannot work.

Still not sure A.D. 70 is fulfillment of Mt. 24. Revelation seems to say a lot more. The thing is, I can see Daniel's 70th week come and taken place in A.D. 70 (maybe). How does any of that explain the battle of Armageddon and the seven vials of wrath. There are 22 chapters in the book of Revelation and we seem to be just scratching the surface on things. I don't know enough to say anything matter of factually except the Immanence of Jesus return and the resurrection.

MB The scripture says the dead are going to rise first. Those arrayed in white robes who return with Jesus at His second coming, are those who you believe them to be? And we which are alive and remain, is that the final resurrection or the catching up of the rest?

[good samaritan]

Interesting thought also. How long was the siege on Jerusalem in A.D. 70? 3 1/2 years maybe?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Still not sure A.D. 70 is fulfillment of Mt. 24. Revelation seems to say a lot more. The thing is, I can see Daniel's 70th week come and taken place in A.D. 70 (maybe). How does any of that explain the battle of Armageddon and the seven vials of wrath. There are 22 chapters in the book of Revelation and we seem to be just scratching the surface on things. I don't know enough to say anything matter of factually except the Immanence of Jesus return and the resurrection.

Rev 1:7 says that Christ would come and those who pierced him would see him. That means the actual generation and not their descendants because Ezekiel 18:1-4 said the sins of the fathers could not be put upon the children so as to make the children guilty of crucifying the Lord. Otherwise, if it's Jews today it's racism. And the Greek for KINDREDS OF THE EARTH is literally TRIBES OF THE LAND.

Anyway, check this free online book out:

http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freeb...s/2206_47e.htm

I HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT.

MB The scripture says the dead are going to rise first. Those arrayed in white robes who return with Jesus at His second coming, are those who you believe them to be? And we which are alive and remain, is that the final resurrection or the catching up of the rest?

I believe the final resurrection is the catching away of the saints. There is only one time for resurrection. The saints who've gone on before will of course come with Christ. We'll meet them in the air. The Greek term MEET implies going out to meet someone and ushering them back here.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Interesting thought also. How long was the siege on Jerusalem in A.D. 70? 3 1/2 years maybe?

Yes!

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Rev 1:7 says that Christ would come and those who pierced him would see him. That means the actual generation and not their descendants because Ezekiel 18:1-4 said the sins of the fathers could not be put upon the children so as to make the children guilty of crucifying the Lord........

Won't everyone in the resurrection see him? In other words those who died 2000 years ago will one day see the one they pierced without it actually being in that generation?

Ex 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Yes!

No. Titus' army was still outside Jerusalem shortly before Passover, AD 70. Preterists like to claim the "3.5year" or "42 month" time period when the holy city would be trodden under foot by the Gentiles (Rev 11) was fulfilled in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem but it simply doesn't fit the historical facts.

Not to mention the Gentiles, once they entered Jerusalem, would tread it down for FAR LONGER than three and a half years, more like centuries and almost two MILLENNIA.

Brother Blume, several times in these discussions you have downplayed the importance of knowing history. I can see why: history does not support the claims of preterism.

The Olivet prophecy of Jerusalem's desruction does not teach a 3.5 year Great Tribulation.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

No. Titus' army was still outside Jerusalem shortly before Passover, AD 70. Preterists like to claim the "3.5year" or "42 month" time period when the holy city would be trodden under foot by the Gentiles (Rev 11) was fulfilled in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem but it simply doesn't fit the historical facts.

That's not the time period where 3.5 years occurred. The siege itself lasted 3.5 years.

Not to mention the Gentiles, once they entered Jerusalem, would tread it down for FAR LONGER than three and a half years, more like centuries and almost two MILLENNIA.

Jerusalem was trodden down in that short time period since it was razed the round. You can'd tread it down any more than razing it to the ground. But Revelation actually stated the time period.

Revelation 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

How much plainer does it have to get?

Brother Blume, several times in these discussions you have downplayed the importance of knowing history. I can see why: history does not support the claims of preterism.

Wrong. Misrepresentation. I rarely use history since BIBLE is the only solid ground, but I have used it TWO TIMES recently, and then get accused by Aquila that I stand on history like futurists stand on newspapers today.

So, your post is like the mourners who complain I am dancing, and Aquila's post is like the dancers who complain when I mourn.

The Olivet prophecy of Jerusalem's desruction does not teach a 3.5 year Great Tribulation.

I never said it did! Really,m you need to read more carefully. You've done this over and over again. Goodsamaritan asked how long the siege lasted. I said he was correct in saying 3.5 years.

Just google "siege lasted three and a half years" in QUOTES beside the word Jerusalem outside the quotes (or other combinations of similar words related to the issue) and see for yourself.