Evidence for God from Science

I have so. I mentioned Ezekiel 38, Matt 24, and the entire book of Daniel. You seem to think its a salvation issue which view of the rapture we believe in. Is God going to ask us whether or not we were pre-tribbers or not? Apparently the answer is yes.

I doubt if any of the people you quoted from believe the book was written before 70 ad. Certainly not Robert Sproll. He was not a preterist, I don't believe. I must ask both you and Bizzt what your views on salvation are. Are we saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ? Or are we saved by having the correct view of the end times? Has it occured to you that its an inhouse debate among Christians? Most scholars believe the date for Revelation is 96 ad.

Wayne,

I'm not questioning your salvation, only your worldview. And you still didn't quote any verses.

waynes world wrote:I have so. I mentioned Ezekiel 38, Matt 24, and the entire book of Daniel.

Where in Ezekiel 38, Matthew 24, and Daniel? Please quote the exact verses and expound.

waynes world wrote:I doubt if any of the people you quoted from believe the book was written before 70 ad. Certainly not Robert Sproll. He was not a preterist, I don't believe. I must ask both you and Bizzt what your views on salvation are. Are we saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ? Or are we saved by having the correct view of the end times? Has it occured to you that its an inhouse debate among Christians? Most scholars believe the date for Revelation is 96 ad.

Wayne,

ALL of the scholars I listed believe that Revelation was written prior to 70 AD. Are you talking about R.C. Sproul? He's not a preterist? Perhaps you had better read The Last Days According to Jesus. He is most certainly a preterist. He also has Kenneth Gentry speak regularly at his annual conference (See Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation by Kenneth Gentry, a book to which dispensational scholars have no reply.)

In any case, there is no consensus on the date of Revelation. Rather than put it up for a vote, how about we examine the evidence? I have provided ample evidence in support of the early date. You haven't provided any in support of the late date, you just keep repeating it as a matter of fact. This is because, aside from the questionable statement by Ireneaus, there isn't any evidence to support it.

No Wayne, this doesn't affect your salvation. That doesn't mean that it is unimportant. If anyone doesn't believe that endtimes views are important, just remember Waco, Texas; Jonestown, South Africa, etc. Jesus tells us that we are to live "by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." Matthew 4:4.

I have never heard of any of the people you mentioned except for Sproul. He may be a post tribber, I don't know. But the end times is important of course. But believing in the pre-trib view doesn't affect ones salvation. I have heard of some people who actually believe that. The preterist view is a strange one in my opinion. I have yet to see how any of the plagues John mentioned could have happened in 70ad. Remember John was in exile on Pathmos during that time so I doubt if he would have known about any event that happened in 70ad. He certainly would have been alive during that time. Most of the scholars I am famaliar with have a date of at least 90ad. The point is not when it was written. The point is will we be ready when the Lord comes? I find it amazing that neither you nor Bisst have answered my question.

Sorry about the name, I think your name is Bizzt.

waynes world wrote:I find it amazing that neither you nor Bisst have answered my question.

Which Question? I've tried to answer all of them.

waynes world wrote:I doubt if any of the people you quoted from believe the book was written before 70 ad. Certainly not Robert Sproll. He was not a preterist, I don't believe. I must ask both you and Bizzt what your views on salvation are. Are we saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ? Or are we saved by having the correct view of the end times? Has it occured to you that its an inhouse debate among Christians? Most scholars believe the date for Revelation is 96 ad.

I am saved by Grace through Faith. Can you please I ASK Please show me the proof that Revelation was written in 96 AD. You have not given any proof of why you believe that!

waynes world wrote:I have never heard of any of the people you mentioned except for Sproul. He may be a post tribber, I don't know. But the end times is important of course. But believing in the pre-trib view doesn't affect ones salvation. I have heard of some people who actually believe that. The preterist view is a strange one in my opinion. I have yet to see how any of the plagues John mentioned could have happened in 70ad. Remember John was in exile on Pathmos during that time so I doubt if he would have known about any event that happened in 70ad. He certainly would have been alive during that time. Most of the scholars I am famaliar with have a date of at least 90ad. The point is not when it was written. The point is will we be ready when the Lord comes? I find it amazing that neither you nor Bisst have answered my question.

The Point is always will we be ready when the Lord Comes! That is not the Discussion taking place here. Puritan, You, and I believe we are saved by the Grace of God! However we are having a discussion here about Revelation being written in 90AD, Higher and Lower. A Discussion about a Pre-Trib Rapture or was the Tribulation actually in 70AD. Wayne can you answer one question? What DO YOU think Puritan Lad Believes?

Thanks

I am not sure to be honest with you. I am glad you agree with the part about being ready when the Lord comes and he can come at anytime. I read that in Matt 24 in the end of the chapter. I want to beliebe PL is saved. I hope thats the case. I don't really care what view of the end times he believes in but I have never heard of his position before. I am familiar with the preterist view and I still don't think thats a Biblical view. It sounds like he believes that the resurrection is a future even, and not something that happened in 70ad. My problem is with the tribulation having happened then. It would make a lot more sense to say it happened during world war 2 when Hitler was ruling Germany and 6 million Jews were killed by his order. Like I said i think the Jews have to return to their homeland before the resurrection at least can happen. The Jews were a people of course but they didn't have a homeland until 1948. The war of 1973 was the one that put Israel in charge of much of the area it had during Solomon's reign. Its not a salvation issue with me and its an inhouse debate among Christians. With me anyway I have hope that the Lord will return during my lifetime and maybe I might not have to die. We will all be changed into Christs likeness in a moment of time. Thats what we all look forward to if we know Christ as our savior.

Wayne,

I've been pretty thorough at outlining my view. I'm not sure what more I can do.

puritan lad wrote: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?

I have read all of that and I don't see in any way how Nero would qualify as the beast. John was exiled on Patmos if you remember when Revelation was written. I doubt if he would have heard about anything that happened in 70ad. He would have talked about it don't you think? The tribulation has to be a future event that John wrote about. Its just out of convenience that the date is 68 ad and it exists for just one reason: to make valid the preterist argument. The plagues that John wrote about have not happened yet and they must happen. Israel was scattered in 70ad. Yet the opposite has to happen before any tribulation can come true. Why is there a tribulation at all? Is it not to bring Israel back to the Lord? If you read Ezekiel, especially chapter 38 that point is made there. I ask you the same thing I asked Bzzt and I liked his answer. Are you ready for the Lord when he comes? Thats what matters here.

waynes world wrote:I have read all of that and I don't see in any way how Nero would qualify as the beast.

Why not? Who else could qualify? The beast is almost an exact description of the 4th Beast of Daniel 7 (Rome). Nero was the 6th Roman emperor (Rev. 17:10) and had great authority (Rev. 13:2). He is only one of two Roman Emperors to have demanded divine honors while he was still alive, claiming to be the god Apollo (Rev. 13:5-6). He made war with the Saints (Rev. 13:7). His persecution lasted almost exactly 42 months (Rev. 13:5). He killed with the sword (Paul) and was killed by his own sword (Rev. 13:10). The number of his name is 666 (Rev. 13:18). When you consider that Revelation was written to first century Churches (Rev. 1:4) about things that were to happen shortly (Rev. 1:1), were near (Rev. 1:3) and were about to take place (Rev. 1:19), who else would even be a candidate? As Kenneth Gentry writes, "If the shoe fits, wear it. Nero's footprints are all over the Book of Revelation."

waynes world wrote:John was exiled on Patmos if you remember when Revelation was written. I doubt if he would have heard about anything that happened in 70ad. He would have talked about it don't you think?

That's why it was a "Revelation". Jesus Christ came to John on Patmos to "shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass".

waynes world wrote:The tribulation has to be a future event that John wrote about. Its just out of convenience that the date is 68 ad and it exists for just one reason: to make valid the preterist argument.

It's more than just a convenience. When the evidence is examined, it is nearly rock solid.

waynes world wrote:The plagues that John wrote about have not happened yet and they must happen. Israel was scattered in 70ad. Yet the opposite has to happen before any tribulation can come true. Why is there a tribulation at all? Is it not to bring Israel back to the Lord?

No. The tribulation was to "miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons." (Matthew 21:41). By rejecting Christ, and deciding to put Him to death, the first Century Jews "filled up the measure of their fathers" (Matthew 23:32). They cried out, "We have no king but Caesar," (John 19:15). They were held accountible for "all the righteous blood shed upon the earth" (Matthew 23:35, Rev. 17:6). Their desolation was determined when they proclaimed, "Let his blood be on us and on our children!" (Matthew 27:25). The judgment for this blood was to come upon that generation (Matthew 23:36, 24:34). Their temple would be destroyed and their house left desolate (Matthew 23:38, 24:1-3). This is why Jesus warned His disciples during the tribulation.

Luke 21:20-24
“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled."

The Great Tribulation was for Israel's destruction, not their salvation.

waynes world wrote:If you read Ezekiel, especially chapter 38 that point is made there.

I've read Ezekiel 38 many times. It says nothing about Israel returning to their land. It is a prophecy about the Scythian Invasion, where the Assyrians were defeated by Judas Maccabeaus in the second century B.C. Notice the weapons and equipment used in the invasion.

All of the army is riding horses, carrying swords, shields, and helmets.

Ezekiel 38:4-5
"...all your army, horses, and horsemen, all splendidly clothed, a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords...all of them with shield and helmet;

They invade Israel to take their livestock

Ezekiel 38:13
"Have you gathered your army to take booty, to carry away silver and gold, to take away livestock and goods, to take great plunder?'”

After the war, victorious Israelites burn wooden weapons for fuel for 7 years.

Ezekiel 39:9-10
“Then those who dwell in the cities of Israel will go out and set on fire and burn the weapons, both the shields and bucklers, the bows and arrows, the javelins and spears; and they will make fires with them for seven years. They will not take wood from the field nor cut down any from the forests, because they will make fires with the weapons;"

If this is supposed to refer to a future event, then we are talking some serious cuts in military funding by somebody :)

waynes world wrote:I ask you the same thing I asked Bzzt and I liked his answer. Are you ready for the Lord when he comes? Thats what matters here.

Yes I am, although I have much work to do before then.

I see nothing in Nero that would make him the beast. Hitler would be a much better qualification. John was isolated from the world when he was exiled and I think he would have written about it if the beast really was Nero. Thats impossible even if Revelation was written in 70 ad! He came to power before 68 ad which means that the book would have to be written much earlier than that. I really think you're grasping for straws if you think Ezekiel 38 doesn't relate to Israel. The whole point of the plagues was to redeem Israel. IF you have read the minor prophets they all point out how Israel had turned its back on God and went to Babylon over it. God is using the plagues to bring Israel to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. The Jews rejected him just as the forefathers warned they would.

waynes world wrote:I see nothing in Nero that would make him the beast. Hitler would be a much better qualification. John was isolated from the world when he was exiled and I think he would have written about it if the beast really was Nero. Thats impossible even if Revelation was written in 70 ad! He came to power before 68 ad which means that the book would have to be written much earlier than that.

Why would the first century churches of Asia be concerned with Hitler? They were more concerned with their persecustion under Nero.

Besides, I never said that Revelation was written in 70 AD. I said that it was written BEFORE 70 AD, while the temple was still standing (Rev. 1,2,8), while Nero was on the throne (Rev. 17:10). Nero is the perfect candidate for the Beast, as I have shown above.

waynes world wrote:I really think you're grasping for straws if you think Ezekiel 38 doesn't relate to Israel. The whole point of the plagues was to redeem Israel.

Ezekiel 38 makes no mention of Jews returning to their land, and it certainly makes no mention of any 20th Century event. What about the horsemen, shields, spears, swords, bows and arrows, etc? I thought that Dispensationalists took prophecy "literally".

Who is Israel in the Bible Wayne? I'd like to hear your definition.

waynes world wrote:IF you have read the minor prophets they all point out how Israel had turned its back on God and went to Babylon over it. God is using the plagues to bring Israel to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. The Jews rejected him just as the forefathers warned they would.

I agree. But the Babylonian exile already took place. Modern Day Israel is not mentioned in the Bible.