Fulfilled Prophecy
July 10th, 2010 | Eschatology | No Comment
Is God Late On Fulfilled Prophecy?
Futurists are well aware of the immanency of end times Bible prophecy. This fact is evident in the many attempts to explain or defend the so-called delay of the Lord's coming. In other
words, they believe God is late and they are ready to write him an excuse to let him back into prophecy class, like a student with a note from a parent. There is no escaping the fact that Jesus and His apostles taught, and both believers and non-believers' expectations from those teachings was an imminent end of the world. To this very day, ...
Are These Practical Implications of Preterism Prac...
March 23rd, 2009 | Preterism | No Comment
Image via Wikipedia
This is our last in the critique of Dr. Edward
Hinson’s article referred to in previous posts.
He lists several items as implications.
We ask, Are These Practical Implications of
Preterism Practical?
Most of these are commonly believed by all futurists as serious implications to the Preterism or fulfilled Bible prophecy.
Some of them are outright contradictions of texts which should be common knowledge for Bible students.
Destroys the Literal Meaning of the Bible
Dr. Hinson argues that a fulfilled coming of Christ at AD 70 destroys the literal meaning of the Bible. He claims that once one argues that language of prophecy cannot be taken ...
Resurrection in 1 Thessalonians 4: Are We Who Are ...
February 20th, 2009 | Rapture | 2 Comments
Image via Wikipedia
1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, incites emotionally
charged discussions about the resurrection
and the rapture.
Students of John Nelson Darby, credited
with popularizing modern Dispensationalism
cite the text as incontrovertible proof of
the Rapture.
However, these exegetes (scripture
interpreters) violate hermeneutic principles
in their application of the text.
The following demonstrate some of the
errors glossed over by futurists and pre-
tribulation rapture advocates. Resurrection in 1 Thessalonians 4: Are We Who Alive Dead?, addresses the specific audience of the text.
The problem with most interpreters on the Lord's return is that they read themselves versus the audience into the text. We show this
as a faulty premise.
We Who Are AliveAnd Remain
Paul ...
Dividing Matthew 24 – In That Day
December 6th, 2008 | Jewish Eschatology | No Comment
We have examined two previous
arguments on Matthew 24. See
the previous articles in the links
below.
Here, the focus of dividing Matthew
24 – in that day deserves our
attention.
Why is this argument important in
the discussion?
It’s because most futurists conced
it is the second coming of Christ.
We do understand that there are
some who see the entire chapter
of Matthew 24 as fulfilled.
Matthew 24:36
“But of that day and hour no one
knows…”
In the next lesson, we will discuss
the concept of “no one knows.”
Our purpose here is to show that
“that day” refers to the destruction
of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, not a future
event.
To demonstrate our premise, we
focus on an event mentioned
earlier ...
Can Matthew 24 Be Divided-2?
December 6th, 2008 | Eschatology | 1 Comment
In part one of this study, we looked
at two arguments offered by futurists
on the question of can Matthew 24
be divided?
In this segment we’’ll discuss another
popular argument. It is based on
verse 36, particularly styled the
“that day” argument.
Those who advance it say that
Jesus spoke of “those days”
when discussing Jerusalem’s fall.
However, when he spoke of his
Parousia, or coming, he spoke of
“that day.”
This to futurists, amillennialists,
dispensationalists and even some
partial presterists is believed to be
a solid argument for a different comng.
Our approaching in this writing will
consider the parallel texts in Luke 17
We are given clear examples of how
to interpret passages using “those days”
and “that day” in ...