Evidence for God from Science

puritan lad wrote:

bizzt wrote:Puritan Indeed Peter talked about the Moon into Blood but he was not talking about the Tribulation. AND if he was why did he repeat the Prophesy in Joel? When was the Great and Notable day of the Lord?

Sorry I just wanted to come back to this particular Passage.

Peter was not talking about the tribulation, but he was talking about a first century event, the Day of Pentecost. The prophecy was repeated by Peter as a matter of it's fulfillment. Peter writes, "This (The Holy Spirit Baptism) is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel..." and then proceeds to quote the entire prophecy. The point is that this entire prophecy, according to Peter, was fulfilled on that Day, including the "signs in the heavens". It was this day that Old Covenant Judaism ceased to be a worthwhile atonement. When the Jewish people cried out, "“His blood be on us and on our children” (Matthew 27:25), it was then that their desolation was determined (Dan. 9:27).

As far as it's relationship to the Olivet Discourse, there is no need to assume that everything in it was fulfilled during a tribulation period, only that all of these things, including the tribulation, would be fulfilled withing the Apostles' generation. (Matthew 24:34)

Ok then,

Was the Tribulation in Revelations a Chronological Event?

bizzt wrote:Ok then,

Was the Tribulation in Revelations a Chronological Event?

No. The book of Revelation, for the most part, was a prophecy written to the First Century Churches of Asia Minor (Rev. 1:4) about "things which must shortly take place" (1:1), were "near" (1:3), and "about to take place" (1:19). The theme is pretty much identical to the Olivet Discourse, and much of the imagery comes directly out of the Old Testament.

bizzt wrote:Ok then,

Was the Tribulation in Revelations a Chronological Event?

Sorry, I didn't completely answer the question.

No, The Tribulation described in Revelation was more parenthetical. It gives three overviews (seals, viles, trumpets), and each time it goes into more detail, sometimes over the whole period, and others simply a part of the period.

bizzt wrote:1 Thes 4
I believe this may talk about the Rapture as when the Resurrection takes place according to Revelations the New Jerusalem will come down to Earth. Now if this is true why would we be caught up? I might have to read through my last posts to see if I did talk about that.

I was referring to your last post before this one. Where you said "The only way we will be Dead in our Sins if Christ did not Die on the Cross. The Rapture has nothing to do with the Resurrection. The Rapture is a Theory that ones who are Dead in Christ and who are alive are Raptured up before the Great Tribulation. It has nothing to do with the Resurrection!"

In hindsight after re-reading it myself, it seems that you're just referring to the theory of pre-trib rapture rather than the event itself. If that's true then I agree and my question was out of context. Sorry 'bout that.

puritan lad wrote:In short, all of Jesus' Olivet Discourse was fulfilled within that generation. There is simply no getting around what Jesus clearly stated in verse 34.

Hope this helps a little.

It does help; thanks for taking the time. Not that I agree, but that I'm closer to understanding what you believe.

Felgar wrote:

bizzt wrote:1 Thes 4
I believe this may talk about the Rapture as when the Resurrection takes place according to Revelations the New Jerusalem will come down to Earth. Now if this is true why would we be caught up? I might have to read through my last posts to see if I did talk about that.

I was referring to your last post before this one. Where you said "The only way we will be Dead in our Sins if Christ did not Die on the Cross. The Rapture has nothing to do with the Resurrection. The Rapture is a Theory that ones who are Dead in Christ and who are alive are Raptured up before the Great Tribulation. It has nothing to do with the Resurrection!"

In hindsight after re-reading it myself, it seems that you're just referring to the theory of pre-trib rapture rather than the event itself. If that's true then I agree and my question was out of context. Sorry 'bout that.

Agreed and No Worries!

Let me give a brief overview of the partial preterist view.

1.) The great tribulation refers to the events surrounding the Destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. Daniel's 70 week prophecy has been completely fulfilled.

2.) There is no future "world dictator". The "beast" was Nero Caesar's Roman Empire, the "little horn" in Daniel is used to describe several people, most notably Antiochus Epiphanes. The word "anti-christ" only appears 4 times in the Bible and is defined as "he who denies that Jesus is the Christ". (1 John 2:22).

3.) Most of the prophecies in the Bible have been fulfilled, with only the Second Advent (Acts 1), the Resurrection (John 6), and the Final Judgement (2 Peter 3:7) yet to take place.

4.) We believe in the success, not the failure, of the Great Commission (Psalm 22:27-28).

5.) We do not believe that there will be a future reign on earth. We believe that the church is the New Jerusalem, the true bride of Christ, the mother of us all (Galatians 4:26; 6:16).

6.) Finally, we do not believe that the Bible contains direct prophecies about 21st Century events. Rather we believe that "He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be destroyed is death" (1 Cor. 15:25-26).

August and Bob, anything I missed?

bizzt wrote:

waynes world wrote:Peter never said such a thing. There was no resurection in 70ad. That idea isn't Biblical. There will be a resurection but not until Isreal returns to its homeland and the exact opposite happpened in 70ad.

Sorry Re-reading over some things here

After Puritan Responded to Wayne about the Moon turning to Blood I decided to finally look up the Scriptural Reference. Peter talks about the day of Pentecost in
Act 2:20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

Puritan Indeed Peter talked about the Moon into Blood but he was not talking about the Tribulation. AND if he was why did he repeat the Prophesy in Joel? When was the Great and Notable day of the Lord?

Sorry I just wanted to come back to this particular Passage.

I don't see what any of that has to do with the pentecost or with anything that happened in 70 ad. Especially if Revelation was written in 96ad 25 years later! That refrence in Joel is definately talkling about the tribulation. Otherwise John is lying because he makes the same comment in Revelation. THe rapture comes before the tribulation. It has to be the case oor Paul is lying in 1 Cor 15:51. He is also lying in 1 thes 4. Without the hope of being resurrected to reign with Christ we are dead in our sins and Christ's death was in vain. What kind of hope does any Christian have if there is no rapture? How about Israel returning to its homeland? That didn't happen in 70ad. The opposite happened. Israel became a nation in 1948. Thats what Jesus talked about in Matt 24. Israel became a nation and the generation Jesus talks about is not the first century one but the present one. There couldn't have been any tribulation in 70ad because there were no plagues that happened then. Why would John prophesy about something that happened 25 years earlier? That makes no sense!

puritan lad wrote:

bizzt wrote:Ok then,

Was the Tribulation in Revelations a Chronological Event?

No. The book of Revelation, for the most part, was a prophecy written to the First Century Churches of Asia Minor (Rev. 1:4) about "things which must shortly take place" (1:1), were "near" (1:3), and "about to take place" (1:19). The theme is pretty much identical to the Olivet Discourse, and much of the imagery comes directly out of the Old Testament.

The prophecy has nothing to do with any first century Christian. Which of the plagues happened in 70ad? What hope does any Christian have if your argument is true? I still havent heard an answer. And I don't want to hear about going to heaven when we die. There has to be a physical ressurection. Otherwise Paul is a big liar and none of his epistles are trustworthy

waynes world wrote:Without the hope of being resurrected to reign with Christ we are dead in our sins and Christ's death was in vain. What kind of hope does any Christian have if there is no rapture?

I agree with most of you're saying Wayne, but not this one. Whether there is or is not a rapture is not central Christian doctrine. Like Bizzt said, our eternal being is saved regardless of when our physical bodies are resurrected. And additionally, no one denies that the resurrection will take place - the only argument is about WHEN it will take place in relation to the Rapture.

The hope I have if there's no rapture is the very same hope that Paul and all the Apostles had - they had no rapture yet they are saved. I think you're confusing the rapture with the resurrection - a point that I see now, bizzt has already tried to make with you. Please address it.

Certainly. If I understand 1 Cor 15 Paul makes it very clear that there has to be a resurrection of the saints. The mortal must put on the immortal. Is that understood? Thats a lot more than just saying we will go to heaven when we die. Paul says we will not all die! Thats the hope we have as Christians. We will not proceed those who have fallen asleep. We will see them when Christ returns in the air for them. Then those of us who remain will be gathered to him and be with him forever and ever. There may be some confusion on the terms here. There are I believe 3 resurrections that will happen. The first one is the one I just described in which we who follow Christ will join with him in the clouds. He will not touch the earth. The second resurrection may be what Jesus talks about in Matt 24. There will be people who will be convinced that Jesus is the messiah after watching the moon turn to blood and the sun turn black and the 100 pound hailstones fall upon the heads of those who have the mark of the beast. Those people will be part of the second resurrection when Jesus touches the ground and splits the Mount of Olives in two. I know thats in the O.T. but I don't know the exact scripture. Then the 3rd resurrection will be for the rest who be cast into the lake of fire by Christ during the time the prophets refer to as the "day of the Lord.''
I think the question is not when all of this will happen or how it happens. The question is will be ready? I hope the Lord says to me somesay "well done good and faithful servant." I hope thats the case for you. Someday we'll all meet in heaven and things like this will seem so ridiculous in comparison. Amen?

Everyone here agrees that we will be resurrected. That includes myself and Puritan. So at this point, I'm not sure what you're trying to get across.

waynes world wrote:I don't see what any of that has to do with the pentecost or with anything that happened in 70 ad.... That refrence in Joel is definately talkling about the tribulation.

Peter Disagrees. Since he was inspired by the Holy Spirit, I'll go with him.

Acts 2:16-20
“But this (the Pentecostal outpouring, not the tribulation) is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:

'And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your young men shall see visions, Your old men shall dream dreams. And on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days; And they shall prophesy. I will show wonders in heaven above And signs in the earth beneath: Blood and fire and vapor of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD.”

waynes world wrote:Especially if Revelation was written in 96ad 25 years later!

Prove it Wayne. Revelation was written prior to 68 AD. I've shown overwhelming evidence to support this. If you want to support the 96 AD date, then the burden of proof is on you. Where is the evidence?

waynes world wrote:Israel became a nation in 1948. Thats what Jesus talked about in Matt 24. Israel became a nation and the generation Jesus talks about is not the first century one but the present one.

Where does Jesus say this in Matthew 24 Wayne? You have yet to provide the verse.

waynes world wrote:The prophecy has nothing to do with any first century Christian.

Revelation 1:4
“John, to the seven churches which are in Asia:”

Seems pretty clear to me who John is writing to. Wayne, it seems to me that this doctrine is one that you don't want to examine, but are willing to defend at all costs. You keep repeating the same things over and over again, but provide no evidence or scriptural support. I'll continue to debate this, but we don't seem to be getting anywhere.

You are the only one I've heard of that denies the letter was written after 90 ad. I don't see how the letter could have been written as soon as 68 ad. John was a bit younger than the rest of the disciples. If you remember he was boiled in oil but survived. It was after that when he wrote the letter. I don't see how the '7 churches in aisa" means the tribulation happened in 70ad. I still haven't seen any proof that any of the plagues happened in 70 ad. The fact remains Israel has to return to its homeland before any tribulation can happen. That took place in 1948 not sooner. Jesus talks about it in Matt 24. So does Ezekiel in chapter 38.Also Daniel talks about that too. Have you read the minor prophets? They all say that too. The point remains: are we ready?

waynes world wrote:You are the only one I've heard of that denies the letter was written after 90 ad.

Let me fill you in on some others (over 100). I included a few extra in case I had any repeats. Easy to do in a list this long.

1. Kenneth Gentry
2. David Chilton
3. Gary DeMar
4. R.C. Sproul
5. R.C. Sproul Jr.
6. Greg Bahnsen
7. Gary North
8. Gordon J. Wenhem
9. Keith Mathison
10. Ed Stevens
11. David Green
12. James B. Jordan
13. Phillip Carrington
14. Ray Sutton
15. Austin Farrer
16. J. Massyngberde Ford
17. Meredith Kline
18. James Stuart Russell
19. Moses Stuart
20. Henry Barclay Swete
21. Milton S. Terry
22. R.J. Rushdoony
23. Samuel M. Frost
24. Walt Hibbard
25. Francis Nigel Lee
26. Dave MacPherson
27. Philip Mauro
28. Jay Adams
29. Kelly Nelson Birks
30. John L. Bray
31. F.F. Bruce
32. Kenneth Davies
33. P.S. Desprez
34. Jonathan Edwards
35. E.B. Elliott
36. F.W. Farrar
37. Jack Gillespie
38. Steve Gregg
39. Henry Hammond
40. Ernest Hampden-Cook
41. Daniel Harden
42. Walt Hibbard
43. Donald Hochner
44. J. Marcellus Kik
45. Max King
46. Tim King
47. Greg Kiser
48. Joseph Lewis
49. John Lightfoot
50. John Locke
51. James MacDonald
52. James MacKnight
53. Ron McRay
54. Arthur Melanson
55. J.D. Michaelis
56. Stan Moody
57. Ovid Need, Jr.
58. Thomas Newton
59. N. Nisbett
60. Gary North
61. Randall Otto
62. William W. Patton
63. Don Preston
64. Joseph Ernest Renan
65. Daniel Silvestri
66. Kurt M. Simmons
67. Foy Wallace
68. N.T. Wright
69. John Noe
70. Phillip Schaff
71. Frederic W. Farrar
72. James M. MacDonald
73. F.N. Lee
74. Ovid Need, Jr
75. Francis Schaeffer
76. Charles Hodge
77. Ernest Renan
78. B.F. Westcott
79. J. A. T. Robinson
80. Cornelius Vanderwaal
81. Adam Clarke
82. Francis Nigel Lee
83. David E. Aune
84. G.R. Beasley-Murray
85. James Burton Coffman
86. David Crews
87. Earle Ellis
88. George P. Fisher
89. Joseph A. Fitzmeyer
90. William Hurte
91. George E. Ladd
92. Jim McGuiggan
93. Robert Mounce
94. J.W. Roberts
95. A.H. Strong
96. Arthur Cushman McGiffert
97. C. C. Torrey
98. H.A. Whittaker
99. Herbert B. Workman
100. Robert Young
101. Robert Reymond
102. S. Scott Willett
103. John Owen
104. James Farquharson
105. Peter Toon
106. J. A. De Jong

We also have John's own testimony that the temple was still standing in Jerusalem and that the destruction by the Romans was still future (Rev. 11:1,2,8). We also have his testimony that the Sixth Roman Emperor (Rev. 17:10) was still on the throne (Nero - 54-68 AD).

There is really no internal evidence in the Book itself that points to the late date.

waynes world wrote:I don't see how the '7 churches in aisa" means the tribulation happened in 70ad.

This was written in response to your claim that Revelation had nothing to do with First Century Christians. It most certainly did.

waynes world wrote:The fact remains Israel has to return to its homeland before any tribulation can happen. That took place in 1948 not sooner. Jesus talks about it in Matt 24. So does Ezekiel in chapter 38.Also Daniel talks about that too. Have you read the minor prophets? They all say that too.

You still haven't quoted the exact Scriptures. Please quote the relevant passages from the Bible. You keep saying that they are there, but haven't pointed them out yet.