I must say that eschatology does not hold that much for me either. I have a rather cavalier attitude about it. I know that if I die before Jesus comes back I will go to heaven. I know that if I am still alive when the rapture happens I will go to heaven. Because of those two factors the end times things do not hold much for me.

I have enough to do to study the Bible to learn how God wants me to live without spending time on trying to figure out what is going to happen after I am gone.

In Christ,
George

What I was calling "fragmented" are the various ways many pre-tribs interpret the Scriptures about the end-times. Each time I ask a question, as one who is trying to comprehend the different views, the answers have too many holes or variables.

George, I agree with you. I jokingly refer to myself as a pan-millennialist. I believe that it will all pan out.

I don't treat the issue as unimportant. I would love to be able to spend the time that it would require to research it completely. Maybe in time I will. As GreekTim has pointed out, my focus is on another area. Judge for yourself which is more important.

If it were not important, then why is it, as a single subject, that spans across almost all of the books of the bible? What other occurence in this light, is described so often? None, besides Jesus Christ.

It may all pan out, but doesn't just about everything in the bible? The lack of interest or desire to study something, shouldn't make it any less important in our lives. It is part of the bible, and it should hold just as much importance to us as salvation does as described in God's Word.

Eschatology should be extremely important, because it applies directly to you and to me and what our future is about, it also applies to the Jews, who we are commanded to pray for, and knowing what is to happen to them during the 70th week, should even be more of a reason to be interested in this subject.

Love in Christ,

Jim

Brother Jim, please forgive me for my wording. I did not intend to imply that any part of the Bible is not important. What I was trying to express was a personal preference. As I have said many times previously I have enough to do with trying to learn to live as God would have me live than to be concerned about things in the future.

Is this a contradiction? I do not believe so. I take this verse as meaning that I need to pay a lot more attention to today and how to face the evil of it than I do to the things of the future. As long as I am ready either for my death (which may come from cancer) or the rapture I am secure in knowing where I shall end up.

The canon of the Bible was set the way it was for a reason. I believe that each book of the Bible was set the way it is because that is the way our Heavenly Father wants it to be.

In Christ,
George

No need to apologize brother. I understand what you meant.

You are 100% right. that verse is not a contradiction.

One thing that interests me is how so many people do not read the bible in it's context. The bible was not written with coding or allegorical knowledge only understandable by a celestial being. No, it was written for a common man, with a common mind, and decipherable by common intellect. Therefore, in it's context, it is a very understandable piece of literature, [i]if you are a christian[i].

Every subject approached in the bible always has an explanation for it to let you know if what is about to spoken of is to be taken literally, allegorically, or parably( is that a word?).

Like the Lord making the heavens and the earth and everything therein in 7 days, is there any reason to believe those days ot be any other than 7 literal 24 hour days? No, none whatsoever. If that is the case, then approaching eschatology with the same common sense reveals a fairly easy to grasp subject (if studied thoroughly). The historical view of eschatology is frightening to me. The explanation for all of the events prophesied in the bible, through the historical viewpoint, holds no water whatsoever. As a matter of fact, it denotes a rather frightening approach of God's Word, since the pursuit of it's explanation categorizes things in an allegorical sense that concludes nothing whatsoever to common sense.

Is it worth getting into an argument over? No, not really, nothing should lead to an argument. To my shame, pride alone is what causes arguments.

Either way, I love you all.

In Christ,

Jim

I've been referred here by Davo, from another forum.

All these attempts at futuristic speculative interpretation of numbers are meaningless. The 70 "weeks" finished 490 years after they started, i.e. around AD 34.

The numbers in Daniel 11 & 12 obviously specifically relate to the events in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. They were future to Daniel, but history before the birth of Jesus.

What do you want to know about preterism, Tim? Ask a preterist, not an opponent to the doctrine.

This post was last modified: Sun May 25, 2008 05:14 PM by Ebenezer.

This post was last modified: Sun May 25, 2008 05:38 PM by Ebenezer.

What is your answer for the unconditional promises made to Israel? Israel's being in the land is a promise God made. It has to happen and indeed has happen. How do you explain Israel's existence for the past 2000 years and especially the last 60 if God is not in it?

Those unconditional promises are made in the Old Covenant Scriptures. They are not repeated in the New Covenant Scriptures (aka New Testament), except the Jeremiah 31 prophecy which relates to the New Covenant.

We need to remember that the first promise to Abraham counted in All families on earth. (Gen. 12) A promise repeated after the offering of Isaac, and to Isaac (26:4) and Jacob. (28:14) The promise would be realised through the seed (singular, Christ (Gal. 3.))

Paul makes it very clear the the children of Abraham are children by faith, not natural descent. John (baptist) makes the same point, and John (Apostle) underlines it.

Jhn 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Jesus says to the Jews who rejected him: I know that ye are Abraham's seed .... If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham .... Ye are of [your] father the devil.

The Jews back in Israel, continue to reject their Messiah, Jesus, (may his name be forgotten.) Their presence in the land is therefore not the fulfilment of prophecy. Don't quote Ezek. 36:22 because the restored Israel will be baptised & cleansed.
Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you:

The great wall is not exactly according to prophecy: Jerusalem shall be inhabited [as] towns without walls (Zec. 2)

Notice that the restoration of Ezek. 36 culminates in the oft-repeated promise: And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.

That promise is applied also to the Corinthians, (2 Cor. 6) & perfectly realised in the New Heaven & New Earth. (Rev. 21)

The persistence of the Jewish people is a historical, fact, but not of prophetic significance, nor is their return to the land. Its a political entity. Giving Israel a prophetic significance is a factor in the troubles centred on the Middle East, and the obscene "War on terror" that is plaguing all of us, generating hatred, prejudicing the Gospel & troubling indigenous Christians, and destroying the economy.

I live in a suburb of London where the population in numerical order is Punjabi Sikh; Moslem (Pakistani, Afghani, Somali); Indian Hindu; Christian (mainly RC & Afro-Carribean, with a few English). The Gospel does NOT need Zionism. (Edit for NOT)

This post was last modified: Thu May 29, 2008 12:25 PM by Ebenezer.

Let's start here:

The only "obscenity" I find here, and I use it in the lightest sense of the word, is your apportioning blaming the Middle East conflict and the war on terror on some Christian's eschatology.

1. Modern Israel exists in the middle east as a nation because of a British and then a UN mandate, not because of dispensationalists.
2. The conflict has more to do with Arab countries repeatedly declaring their intention to destroy Israel
3. The war on terror is against Islam, not necessarily for Israel
4. The Middle East conflict is about a secular/Jewish state existing in an area surrounded with Islamic/Arab nations.

When we consider just the Tribulation the Old Testament makes it clear that it exists primarily for the Jewish people, therefore, Israel must have a future. The description of this Tribulation period have never been historically met even though they have endured many horros.

The titles given to this awful time are enough for some to prove that the tribulation has a very specific purpose to the nation of Israel.

In Jeremiah 30:7 it is referred to as the “Time of Jacob’s Trouble.” In Daniel 9 we saw that the vision of the seventy weeks was given for Daniel, his people (Jews) and their city (Jerusalem).

The Tribulation period will draw many Gentiles to Christ, but the focal point will be Israel and once again the channel of blessing will be that great nation. In Revelation 7 we read of 144,000 Jews that will evangelise the world but that the majority would die for their faith.

At the end of the tribulation Israel as a nation will turn back to God. In Zechariah 12:10 we find in that day as the Lord descends the Lord says they “shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.”

Though some argue that this verse refers to all those alive during this time it would seem that it refers only to Israel. Previous verses tell us that the Lord will descend to save Israel from her enemies, God will pour out grace upon the nation and then they will look upon Christ and recognise Him once and for all as their Messiah!

You say that the promises are not found in the New Testament but Matthew 24 definitely speaks of Christ literally interacting with the Jewish people in their land at some future date.

Ezekiel 36 is still relevant as the regathering of Israel is not yet complete......

Before I go any further, Jim I am sure this has been gone over before. Do you have a link to the previous threads that have gone through this? I can just see this circle beginning again and I can't commit the time I think it may need.

You will find this article of interest - the Zionist movement predates Balfour et al.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info...le4959.htm
Lord Shaftesbury, Darby & other 19th C evangelicals & the return of Jews to the land. Dispensationalists were influential in that.

Whatever your views on Donald Wagner, the information is accurate.

MNW, your post is simply assertions without Biblical foundation.

THE great tribulation took place during the siege of Jerusalem, as prophesied by the Lord. (Mat 24) The Jerusalem believers fled the city as they heeded the Lord's warnings.

The great tribulation of Rev. 2:22 was a warning, we have no historical record.

The third great tribulation is in Rev. 7, where the believers delivered from great tribulation stand in heaven before the throne. The number include a symbolic perfect number of Jews (144,000) who I believe are the Jewish remnant who were delivered before the destruction. These would be the 1/3 brought through fire. (Zec. 13)

Zec. 12:10 was fulfilled at Calvary according to John 19:37. When Peter proclaimed salvation through the risen Christ, they were cut to the heart & repented. If we ignore the 12/13 chapter division, the mourners were indeed cleansed of their sin by repentance & baptism in the "fountain".

Ebenezer, I am just tired of going over this again and again. I slipped into it again in this thread and only caught myself after it was too late.

You mention the symbolic perfect number of the Jews? How is that symbolically perfect? What about the 1000 years? How is that symbolic? Does the number of perfection or completion change?

Zec 12:10 refers to the nation, the events at calvery and subsequently at Peter's sermon only involves a handful, what happened there?

Anyway, got to go.