The Olivet Discourse Fulfilled

[puritan lad]

#7 - GOSPEL PREACHED IN ALL THE WORLD

I already dealt with this one. See Romans 1:8, among others. I'm not sure what the fact that "we're still here" has to do with anything.

Daniel gives an account of this.

Daniel 11:31-37 ...

Paul writes in 2Thessalonians 2:1-4 ...

Second we can see that the anti-christ is set up and will be revealed.
If he's been releaved, could you please tell me the name of the anti-christ.

You are all over the place here Led. May ask where Daniel or Paul mention anything about an "Antichrist"? How about Matthew? What is "Antichrist" according to the Bible (Please give scripture). On what basis do you tie Daniel 11 and 2 Thess. 2 together. Why did Paul say that the "mystery of lawlessness is already at work"?

#9,#10 Again with Jac3510 on this one. "This has not happened. It will not happen until the Second Coming."

Peter said that it did (Acts 2:16-21). Joel's prophecy of the "last days" was completely fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost.

[puritan lad]

It is thought that the term "Last days" refers to the last days of the Old Covenant, not last days of the world.

You are correct Sugaaaaa. The Church of the First Century was already living in the last days.

Rom. 13:11-12 - "You know what hour it is, how it is full time now for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed; the night is far gone, the day is at hand."

1 Cor. 7:29-31 - "Brethren, the appointed time has grown very short; from now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none, and those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy as though they had no goods, and those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the form of this world is passing away."

1 Cor. 10:11 - "On [us] the ends of the ages have come."

Phil. 4:5 - "The Lord is at hand."

James 5:8-9 - "The coming of the Lord is at hand. ... Behold, the Judge is standing at the door."

1 Pet. 4:7 - "The end of all things is at hand."

1 Jn. 2:18 - "It is the last hour ... we know that it is the last hour."


Bluesman, Jesus is currently ruling and reigning from "Jerusalem".

Consider Isaiah's Prophecy.

Isaiah 9:6-7
"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgement and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this."

Remember, this is a prophecy about Christ's First Advent, not His Second.

Jesus Christ is the current and eternally reigning King of the World (read Psalm 97:1). He is not waiting to rule from Zion. He is currently upon the throne of His glory. (Psalm 110:1)

The angel of the Lord agrees when he says to Mary,

Luke 1:31-33
“And behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great,and shall be called the Son of the Highest and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end”

Again, this is a prophecy about Christ's birth, not His Second Coming.

Jesus clarified the meaning of His kingdom with His reply to Pliate.

John 18:36
“My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.”

Christ rule is from "the Jerusalem above", which is "the mother of us all" (Galatians 4:26). Christ has no need to rule from some earthly city on the Sinai Peninsula. He will reign from the Heavenly Jerusalem until He has put all enemies under His feet.

The Apostles did not understand this at first (Acts 1:6), until the Day of Pentecost. It was then they understood the nature of the kingdom, as seen by Peter's sermon.

Acts 2:29-36
"Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Until I make thy foes thy footstool. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."

Matthew 21:38
"But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance."

(Hint: They Failed).

Earthly Jerusalem may be the focus of modern dispensationalism and zionism, but is irrelevant to Bible Prophecy.

[led]

PL, I sense your here just to argue. I picked that up from the beginning but I too got sucked in, hoping that we could come together as brothers in Christ. I've gone back and viewed the unfolding of this topic and you just peddle your way through without solid scripture. It would be much better for me to go where it's more constructive. Sad, because I really would like to dig in, as with many others I'm sure.

God bless,

Led

[puritan lad]

Led,

I'm sorry you feel that way. Your biggest problem is that you disagree with me. Therefore, I'm the bad guy.

It would be constructive for you if you did "dig in", but apparently you have pet doctrines that you don't want challenged, so anyone who disagrees with you is "only here to argue". I'm here to "contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints". No more, no less.

Hope you reconsider.

God Bless,

PL

[Jac3510]

But, PL . . . how many times have you been accused of this same thing on these boards. What . . . four or five now?

No, of course, it's all their fault.

[SUGAAAAA]

Thats not any worse than copping out of an argument by personally insulting another member and then leaving, as Led did (ie. you're just here to argue/Im going to someplace more constructive).



I will post more in a minute, after I finish reading an article I have here.

[puritan lad]

But, PL . . . how many times have you been accused of this same thing on these boards. What . . . four or five now?

No, of course, it's all their fault.

No. Just those who agree with you :}

[bluesman]

PL I agree with Led in the sense that I feel your position in this debate is set
in stone and your not really here to learn. Sorry if thats not true.

Other than this debate , what is your belief and relationship with Jesus?

I take it you quote from the King James Version, although you don't put the KJV in.

I wish I knew hebrew and greek, because I believe better translations might make things clearer.

Take for example Isaiah 7:14
"therefore the lord shall give you a sign; Behold , a virgin shall conceive and bear a son , and shall call his name Immanuel. KJV

How do we go from that to Jesus?

One mean savior and the other God is with us.

but that a little off topic.

You have not dealt with Isaiah 2:4
4. "and he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people:
and they shall beat their swords into into plowshares and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore"
KJV


You said
Bluesman, Jesus is currently ruling and reigning from "Jerusalem"

I take it you mean some theoretical interpretation that Jerusalem means Heaven. Maybe I was hoping for much more in the Lords Kingdom , seem like a disappointment to me.

To rule requires judgement with punishment ( and reward) . I don't see God doing that yet here on earth.

Jesus's kingdom is in heaven not here on earth. Just watch world news!
Seems to me satan is the ruler right now. Christianity is shrinking not growing. The majority of the world is not christian.

Our father who art in heaven hallowed be his name.
They kingdom come
They will be done in earth as it is in heaven......
amen

for your homework read Matthew 25:31-32


Mike

[puritan lad]

PL I agree with Led in the sense that I feel your position in this debate is set
in stone and your not really here to learn. Sorry if thats not true.

Ditto to you, Bluesman. But before I go much further here, What exactly is your position here?

As for the scriptures you quoted, I don't see any connection at all between them and the Olivet Discourse.

Other than this debate , what is your belief and relationship with Jesus?

I'll be as descriptive as I can. I am a Born-again, Reformed, 5-point Calvinistic, non-Pentecostal, Covenantal (Non-Dispensationalist), Postmillennial Preterist, Puritan, Westminster Confessing, Infant-Baptizing, Orthodox Presbyterian.

I take it you quote from the King James Version, although you don't put the KJV in.

I actually use the NKJV for the most part.

I wish I knew hebrew and greek, because I believe better translations might make things clearer.

Take for example Isaiah 7:14
"therefore the lord shall give you a sign; Behold , a virgin shall conceive and bear a son , and shall call his name Immanuel. KJV

How do we go from that to Jesus?

One mean savior and the other God is with us.

We get to Jesus by the Word of God, in particularly Matthew 1:22-23.

"So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”"

You have not dealt with Isaiah 2:4
4. "and he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people:
and they shall beat their swords into into plowshares and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore" KJV

In short, this passage has nothing whatsoever to do with the Olivet Discourse. I could address it if you like, but that would be another whole discussion.

You said
Bluesman, Jesus is currently ruling and reigning from "Jerusalem"

I take it you mean some theoretical interpretation that Jerusalem means Heaven. Maybe I was hoping for much more in the Lords Kingdom , seem like a disappointment to me.

To rule requires judgement with punishment ( and reward) . I don't see God doing that yet here on earth.

God is (amd always has) judged on earth. But again, this is another subject, having nothing to do with the Olivet Discourse. I believe the Bible when it tells me that Jesus has already ascended to the throne of David. No reason to believe otherwise.

As far as the Kingdom goes, the Bible is clear in several places that the consummation of the Kingdom will be a slow, gradual process as the gospel goes forth, not by some cataclysmic event. (See Daniel 2:35, 44-45, Matthew 13:31-33).

Jesus's kingdom is in heaven not here on earth. Just watch world news!
Seems to me satan is the ruler right now. Christianity is shrinking not growing. The majority of the world is not christian.

But it will be, as the Bible clearly teaches in many places (Psalm 22:27-28, Habakkuk 2:14 for starters). That is the main difference between premillennialism and postmillennialism. Premillennialism teaches that the Great Commission will actually be a failure in this age. Postmillennialism teaches it's success.

for your homework read Matthew 25:31-32

Who's here to teach and not learn? Again, you haven't given us your view, although I could probably make a pretty good guess.

[bluesman]

I'll be as descriptive as I can. I am a Born-again, Reformed, 5-point Calvinistic, non-Pentecostal, Covenantal (Non-Dispensationalist), Postmillennial Preterist, Puritan, Westminster Confessing, Infant-Baptizing, Orthodox Presbyterian.

Say what? Is that suppose to mean something??

As far as the Kingdom goes, the Bible is clear in several places that the consummation of the Kingdom will be a slow, gradual process as the gospel goes forth, not by some cataclysmic event. (See Daniel 2:35, 44-45, Matthew 13:31-33).

Sorry I don't get that from the scripture you mention, maybe because I have only my Living Bible version and not my KJV with me today.

But it will be, as the Bible clearly teaches in many places (Psalm 22:27-28, Habakkuk 2:14 for starters).

I don't what you were trying to say but yes Jesus's kingdom is coming and will someday "the time will come when the awareness of God's glory will fill the earth"!

Your position if I understand it is that second coming, etc etc. was all fulfilled around 70ad " The preterists insist that this passage - and the Book of Revelation - has been already fulfilled,"

If you just say some verses are dual time prophecy then I agree.

My position that much is not fulfilled yet and Jesus is yet to come to earth aqain, maybe very soon too.

Mike

[Canuckster1127]

I've read through this thread and I'm fairly confused as to why Puritan Lad is being chastised.

I do not subscribe fully to his position, but he has presented it thoroughly and respectfully.

There seems to be some belief among some on this board, that debate is somehow unchristian and that challenging one another to defending and exploring their faith, with a view to modifying if necessary is somehow unchristian.

Unfortunately, this has been a strong undercurrent throughout evangelicalism for much of the last century and it is only now under the the influence of recent evangelical scholarship beginning to change.

If you cannot argue with someone because their education and familiarity with a particular subject is greater than yours it seems to me you have 3 major possibilities.

1. You can listen to what the person is saying and then spend the time challenging yourself and them by your own research into the issue using the multiple sites available in books, theological journals and web-sites.

2. You can make an overall assessment of the argument and decide it isn't worth your time and state that you are unable to discourse on a high level on that subject with the person but that you are comfortable holding to the views you do now. Don't expect to get a lot of respect on a board dedicated to debate and interaction but at least you're being honest.

3. You can try to hide the fact that you either are not well studied on a subject or that you don't care about it and instead of admitting that, you can choose to attack the person, portraying them as arrogant, inflexible are whatever other word you wish, intimating that it is somehow unchristian for them to attempt to understand and explain something to persuade. Afterall, faith needs no defense and we should all just leave each other alone because to do otherwise is somehow rude and pushy.

I'm sure their are some other options which reflect these to varying degrees. But that does seem to capture a good part of it.

I for one do not have as strong a background in eschatology as I do in other fields. I've read Pentecost's Things to come, which I suffered through Kicking and screaming years ago. I think there is a point in which prophesy studies can go beyond being beneficial and become dogmatic and divisive, but I also recognize that that belief can become a defense for or an excuse for not dealing with this important element of Scripture which afterall is inspired and deserves our attention.

Puritan Lad should be commended for his hard work, his passion and his willingness to defend what he states. He should also be given respect for that whether you agree with him or not. I see precious few others being thorough and standing firm and willing to defend their position and I respect that whether I completely agree with him or not.

For the record, my position is premillennialist, post-trib, prewrath but I am not well versed enough in the field to be dogmatic about it and I freely confess that I hold that way in large part because the denomination I was ordained in holds premillennialism as cardinal for missions and the other elements seemed the best based on my limited study and understanding.

That's not particularly strong enough to chastise someone else over, so I think there's room for continued study and reflection on my part.

Bart

[bluesman]

I've read through this thread and I'm fairly confused as to why Puritan Lad is being chastised.

I am sorry Canuckster, but maybe I missed that part of the thread.
What about it Puritan Lad ?

I think when you hold a more minority position on a topic , then you have to expect higher degree of critical debate and questioning.

I think there is a point in which prophesy studies can go beyond being beneficial and become dogmatic and divisive,

I agree with that. I would add that becoming Christian in ones behavior and works is what matters most. For example keeping the 10 Commandments, developing a relationship with Christ.

For the most part I think I hold to what Jack Van Impe says about prophesy, as thats basically where I became interested in it.

However, if you want to put a label , just say I am a student of the bible.


Mike

[Canuckster1127]

I've read through this thread and I'm fairly confused as to why Puritan Lad is being chastised.

I am sorry Canuckster, but maybe I missed that part of the thread.
What about it Puritan Lad ?

I think when you hold a more minority position on a topic , then you have to expect higher degree of critical debate and questioning.

I think there is a point in which prophesy studies can go beyond being beneficial and become dogmatic and divisive,

I agree with that. I would add that becoming Christian in ones behavior and works is what matters most. For example keeping the 10 Commandments, developing a relationship with Christ.

For the most part I think I hold to what Jack Van Impe says about prophesy, as thats basically where I became interested in it.

However, if you want to put a label , just say I am a student of the bible.


Mike

Fair enough. I do agree that the emphasis should be upon that which impacts our daily living.

Prophesy can impact that to some degree and God seems to have dedicated a pretty significant portion of his word to it, so it does demeand our attention.

The best understanding I've gotten hold in this area is to remember that prophesy is more the "fore-telling" the future, although that clearly is an element which we need to pay attention to. More essentially, it is a "forth-telling" of word and direction of God.

I also am aware that prophesy often has fulfillment that comes on several levels and can be on several different time schedules. As such, I would be slightly suspicious (maybe that's not the best word, but it describes my approach) of any system of prophetic interpretation that claims applicability primarily to the fall of Jerusalem and does not address the return of Christ proximate to some of the other elements included.

That having been said, I'm royally turned off from the Hal Lindsey brand that in my opinion seeks to make all prophesy relative to our own circumstances and situations and uses it to bring fear and dogmatism to Christians lives. I think we mistake applicability and assert it with a certainty that belies the text and becomes pretext and has harmed the reputation and message of the Church today. It's not a coincidence that many fringe movements place a high focus on prophetic passages that allow for a flexibility that many wittingly or unwittingly take advantage of.

[puritan lad]

Sorry for the delay. I've been dealing with a nasty computer worm.

I have no problem with "being chastised". Believe me, the posters on this board are much more civil then on some boards. (I introduced preterism on one board and had a bunch of charismatics trying to cast demons out of me.) I'm well aware that Preterism is a minority view (although it is rapidly growing), and I know it will bring more debate than most views. The biggest problem is that many have never heard of preterism. However, once it is studied, most people find it to be very solid biblically.

In any case, the position is out there and should be studied with great care. It is a tremendous apologetic and faith building exercise.

God Bless,

PL