Sven

It's funny that one finds statements like this on every side of every discussion between Christians on the meaning of the bible, one needs only little modifications:

The theory or doctrines of [insert topic] are only supportable by ignoring a multitude of clear [...] statements, or "spiritualizing" and "interpreting" such clear statements in obscure ways contrary to the obvious meaning.

Atheists (and many biblical scholars) have an easy explanation for this: The books of the bible were written by fallible men who (perhaps) thought they were inspired, but clearly were not. And that there's a great deal of legend in their books.

Having said this, I at least agree with Sheshbazzar that preterism is not supported by the text. Unfortunately for him, his view isn't either.

gregor

Well, thanks for cherry-picking portions of the bible.

As I've mentioned to you before, in 150+ CE early Xianity was being challenged by some because the promised second coming had not occurred. Thus, 2 Peter 3 comments:

"3First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4They will say, "Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation."

Then, 2 Peter 3 goes on to give an explanation that the promised coming is right around the corner.

So if Matt was fulfilled in 70 CE with the fall of the temple, why didn't the author of 2 Peter know that? But feel free to try and apologize for this and say it was referring to the OT, or a different coming, or some other excuse.

Sheshbazzar

Sheshbazzar is not a "Christian", and avoids all discussion of Scripture with "Christians". I post here because you are not "Christians".
Are you sufficiently acquainted with my Faith and my doctrine, to know my views? Personally, I think not.

Sven

Sorry. I should have included other Abrahamic faiths as well - or doesn't this cover "MonoYahwistic"?

I know your views on this specific topic - because you posted them in this thread. I can read, you know.

Sheshbazzar

Thank you, yes it does.
You are aware of only a small portion of my view on this specific topic- because what little I have thus far posted, has covered only a small percentage of my view on this specific topic.

I stated that anyone interested may look up those prophetic verses employing such phrases as "All men", "all nations", "all kindreds" and "every eye". examine the context, and answer to yourself truthfully whether or not these things have ever (yet) at any time taken place in recorded history.
If you think that they have, as per my example of Psalm 22:27, provide here the concrete evidence that "ALL men", specifically including the members of this IIDB, now "worship" and "fear" YHWH, and "declare the work of Elohim"
Rather obviously, if such reverence is not to be found amongst "ALL" of you, then this prophecy has not -yet- been fulfilled.
And perhaps it never will be, that however is not the point, the point being that the prophecy says WHAT it says, and ought not be ignored, perverted, or abused just because some would rather not believe in it.
Scholastic integrity requires that the text itself be treated with respect, EVEN IF you regard it as "legend", "fairy tale", or a "cunningly devised fable"

Sven

Since I already found these parts laughable, I see no need to investigate your view further.

And I agreed that they did not. That's why I said that preterism is bullocks.


And my point is that it should have been fulfilled - because Jesus addressed the generation in front of him. As argued by others in this thread and in others.

See, and for me it's obvious that you (and Christians) do just that: "ignore, pervert and abuse" Jesus (supposed) words because you "would rather not believe" that his prophecy failed.

judge

Yes it is funny. Christians are taught to be very intolerant often.

Sheshbazzar

The perquisite foregoing signs have never occurred which would put His prophecy to the test, thus His prophecy has not failed.
If the sun and moon are darkened, and the stars fall from heaven, and "ALL the tribes of the earth -are witnesses to these events and- mourn", And "THEN", and ONLY then, if The Sign of The Son of Man fails to appear in heaven, then only, His prophecy will have failed.
But as of this day His prophecy has not failed, Neither has the prophecy of Psalm 22:27 nor 64:9, nor Joel 3:15.

Sven

You see, exactly because the signs did not happen, the prophecy has failed. Why do you continue to make this argument despite knowing fully well what the position of people here on this "prophecy" is? In case you forgot: See post #7 and #22.

Sheshbazzar

Well, at least we are in agreement that the signs did not happen.
And my position is that the prophecy of His return was from the beginning dependent on these signs happening, (and being visible and known to "ALL" mankind) as this is what the text indicates.

As for Fortuna's post, although somewhat elaborate in an attempted analysis of the Greek text, it totally neglects any consideration of the origins and original contexts that these prophecies first appeared in, and were only being reiterated, That context is provided in the holy Prophets, (Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Joel) on which these sayings were founded and are inextricable from.
I addressed this error of the analysis that appeared in post #7, with my reply in post #9
Actually post #22 only further proves my position, as the text of 2 Peter 3:2 warns to "be mindful of the words which were spoken BEFORE by the holy Prophets," and that still, as of that late date, to those that maintained the Faith, that although that generation had passed; ("for since the fathers fell asleep") the promise of His coming was yet in the future, and certainly to be accompanied by the most dramatic and unmistakable events, as related in 2 Peter 3:10-13 (again, drawn from the eschatological and apocalyptical writings of "the holy Prophets" v. 2)

Bottom line, in this particular matter you are dead wrong, and "You do err, not knowing (or rather in willfully neglecting) The Scriptures (not the NT writings which you have misinterpreted, but the words of "The holy Prophets") nor the power of YHWH"