THE THIRD COMING OF CHRIST

[MISSION-IMPOSSIBLE]

No, I don't think it would. Because the temple being destroyed isn't physical evidence of the end of the OC. It happened decades later, and was unrelated to the OC ending. The scriptures and the Holy Ghost and the testimony of the saints is our evidence. If someone wanted to believe in the OC without the new, there is plenty of "physical evidence", they could use (but no spiritual proof.) Israel survived the destruction and Rabbinical Judaism has flourished, hollow as it is, carrying on the Pharisees legacy.

I don't know why preterists always seem so afraid of Jews and temples. Christianity began just fine with Herods temple up. Everyone knows by now that Jews and Christians are not the same. And if you have concerns about the church being "divided"... we don't need a temple up for that.

Jerusalem was destroyed as a judgement for the rejection of Jesus- and a fulfillment of prophecy. It was a sign to Israel that they were wrong with God as a nation. (And yet they would not recognize it)

After the 70AD destruction, and the Jewish revolts that happened continued later- surely you're aware that Jerusalem became a "christian" city, where they vehemently opposed the rebuilding of the temple- yet they were conquered and the city taken by muslims- SURELY you DO NOT consider that to be "physical evidence" of the end of the new covenant and the beginning of a Muslim age...

While the 1st century Jews rejected the truth, ensuring the destruction of their city- it doesn't change the fact that JESUS- an ISRAELITE- fulfilled the OC.

So, while preterists will say that the jews from generations past ensured that their nation can never be redeemed, others might say that Jesus' fulfillment of the OC guarantees that Israel as a nation will eventually be redeemed.

I've not seen any convincing theology or understanding of prophecy from a preterist point of view... only a sick celebration and veneration of the slaughter of Jews.

OK. I'm sorry that you are not willing to understand the enormity of your error. Perhaps someone else will help you see it.

Take care. 🤫

 

[Evmur]

The only heresy here is the way you think, so if it doesn't say it in black and white, must be false, correct? So, where in the bible does it say, "the SECOND COMING"?

If it doesn't say, why do you believe it? 😇

Hebrews 9.28
So Christ was once offered for the sins of many and unto them that look for Him shall He appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Same games being played. Only the true historic position of the early Church, which is one second coming, during which the dead are raised after which the people who are alive will be raptured to meet the Lord in the air. Very simple.

Very BIZARRE. Think about this crazy scenario for a minute in view of Revelation 19 (which says no such thing, yet is fully focused on the Second Coming).

 

[tourist]

IT would be exactly all those "coming" passages you refer to. REason I think those have not happened is because the resurrection has not taken place clearly, the prophecies in the book of Revelation have not taken place.

I agree with you that the prophecies have not yet taken place otherwise what would be the blessing in reading Revelation which would then become merely an historical account.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The widespread belief of the “Second Coming” of the Lord is probably taught and believed in over 90% of the church. All dispensationalists believe in the second coming as their “hope” is always in the future, never thinking of abiding in the present moment in Christ.

How do you know what any believer is thinking? Where do you get your 'information"?

The OT prophesied TWO advents (comings) of Jesus. The First advent was His virgin birth and ministry as the Suffering Servant, who went to the cross, per Psa 22 and Isa 53.

The Second advent will be His return as King of kings and Lord of lords, which will be at the end of the Tribulation when He returns to end the Trib at the battle of Armageddon and sets up His Millennial kingdom as sole ruler on earth.

There are therefore, only two advents or comings of the Lord. Count on it.

If we are going to believe in the “coming of the Lord”, I suggest that we call it the “THIRD COMING”, not the “Second Coming”

Nope. The OT didn't prophesy about 3. Only 2.

Before I state my case, let’s read the following verse that clearly speaking about the “Second Coming”:

Hebrews 9:28 (NASB95) “So Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.”

• In context, the writer of the Hebrews was writing to Hebrew believers of the 1st century who were being tempted to go back to the Law and hope for the best because the life they were living was too hard due to the cruelty of the unconverted Jews who persecuted them and accused them of being heretics.
• In view of the context of these scriptures, the writer of Hebrews was referring to the soon SECOND COMING which was expected to come when Jerusalem was judged for its many sins (Mat. 23:34-38; 1Thes. 2:14-16), and the destruction of the Jewish temple that took place in AD 70.
• Since the first coming took place in the incarnation when God became Man, and the invisible second coming came to be when Christ judged Jerusalem, while officially ending the old covenant, do you believe in the 3rd coming?

How so? Please respond succinctly if you believe the Lord will be coming visibly, for all to see.

There is no "invisible second coming". Nonsense. When the King of king returns to earth, with ALL of the dead saints with Him, and a trumpet blasting His return, you can believe it won't be invisible or quiet.

By the way, this ridiculous picture of the Lord's coming is nothing but an atrocious way of attempting to imagine the "Second Coming", or the "Third Coming." 😁

View attachment 243290

Well, since you wrongly assume it will be invisible, of course that rendition would look silly to you. But what is actually silly is your claim that His second coming will be invisible. Only to blind people.

And I mean that both literally and spiritually.

 

[MISSION-IMPOSSIBLE]

Hebrews 9.28
So Christ was once offered for the sins of many and unto them that look for Him shall He appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

How do you know what any believer is thinking? Where do you get your 'information"?

The OT prophesied TWO advents (comings) of Jesus. The First advent was His virgin birth and ministry as the Suffering Servant, who went to the cross, per Psa 22 and Isa 53.

The Second advent will be His return as King of kings and Lord of lords, which will be at the end of the Tribulation when He returns to end the Trib at the battle of Armageddon and sets up His Millennial kingdom as sole ruler on earth.

There are therefore, only two advents or comings of the Lord. Count on it.


Nope. The OT didn't prophesy about 3. Only 2.


There is no "invisible second coming". Nonsense. When the King of king returns to earth, with ALL of the dead saints with Him, and a trumpet blasting His return, you can believe it won't be invisible or quiet.


Well, since you wrongly assume it will be invisible, of course that rendition would look silly to you. But what is actually silly is your claim that His second coming will be invisible. Only to blind people.

And I mean that both literally and spiritually.

With the exception of the resurrection of our bodies (Jn 11:24; Phi. 3:20-21; 1Cor. 15:54, etc.) the so-called "Second Coming" is at best a mere assumption. I say that because we have negated the fact that Paul and Peter were writing to their respective churches telling them, not us, what was going to happen. I simply fail to see any reference to the end of history as most of the modern church believes including 1Thes 4:15-17. So, in my opinion, the coming of the Lord does not necessarily mean the end of history, but an event that was about to take place in their lifetime which took place in the judgment of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple which the Lord called "the great tribulation" where 1.1 million Jews died at the hands of the Romans (Mat. 24:21, Rev. 2:22).

We have miserably detected that a book written 2,000 years ago which was written to a people that lived 2,000 years ago was not written to us but to them, so although the Bible was not written to us, it is for us to learn and discover the truth as the Spirit teaches us.

I believe in the resurrection of the dead, which is the hope of the believer, but as far as the physical return of the Lord is equal to the same belief of a physical kingdom that the Jews had while Jesus said, "My kingdom is NOT of this world" (Jn 18:36).

Lastly, so there is no mistake, I do believe that this age of wickedness will come to a final end sooner or later, but when the scriptures speak of the "end of the age", it is referring to the end of the old covenant, not the end of time.

 

[MISSION-IMPOSSIBLE]

So, while preterists will say that the jews from generations past ensured that their nation can never be redeemed, others might say that Jesus' fulfillment of the OC guarantees that Israel as a nation will eventually be redeemed.

I've not seen any convincing theology or understanding of prophecy from a preterist point of view... only a sick celebration and veneration of the slaughter of Jews.

You believe in a people of flesh whom Paul said was destined to perish unless they believed in the Lord. In Romans 9:8, that the children of the flesh (national Israel) were not the children of God, but the children of the promise (those who were born of God's Spirit and who had believed in Jesus as their Messiah).

Your futuristic beliefs are at best a pipe dream in the sky. It has so many holes that it is difficult to argue with people who cannot see things from the Spirit's point of view. For starters, there is not single promise to Israel in the NT. That alone should tell you that God is not interested in raising up a nation that would crucify the Lord of glory all over again if they could.

If you don't believe in historic events, how do you expect us to believe in a fleshly dream that will never take place? Lastly, who celebrates the death of 1.1 million Jews that died at the hands of the Romans? Who celebrates the death of six million Jews who died at the hands of Hitler? Who????

What hellish lies have you been reading?

 

[FreeGrace2]

With the exception of the resurrection of our bodies (Jn 11:24; Phi. 3:20-21; 1Cor. 15:54, etc.) the so-called "Second Coming" is at best a mere assumption.

Really? The Second Coming of the King of kings is WHEN our bodies will be resurrected. Didn't you know that?

I say that because we have negated the fact that Paul and Peter were writing to their respective churches telling them, not us, what was going to happen. I simply fail to see any reference to the end of history as most of the modern church believes including 1Thes 4:15-17.

So, basically, you are just dismissing/rejecting what the Bible teaches. You have lost all credibility if you believe that.

So, in my opinion, the coming of the Lord does not necessarily mean the end of history, but an event that was about to take place in their lifetime which took place in the judgment of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple which the Lord called "the great tribulation" where 1.1 million Jews died at the hands of the Romans (Mat. 24:21, Rev. 2:22).

The second advent isn't the "end of history". It is the beginning of the Millennial reign of Christ on earth literally.

After that, all believers will enter the "eternal state", described in Rev 21.

We have miserably detected that a book written 2,000 years ago which was written to a people that lived 2,000 years ago was not written to us but to them

And by extention, to US. Your ignorance is showing.

, so although the Bible was not written to us, it is for us to learn and discover the truth as the Spirit teaches us.

You have really been deceived.

 

[SomeDisciple]

You believe in a people of flesh whom Paul said was destined to perish unless they believed in the Lord.

First of all, you have no idea what I believe, because I haven't told you. Anyone that doesn't believe will perish, sure.

In Romans 9:8, that the children of the flesh (national Israel) were not the children of God, but the children of the promise (those who were born of God's Spirit and who had believed in Jesus as their Messiah).

That's right: but what you have conveniently ignored is that you boast against the natural branches when he is able to graft them in again.

Your futuristic beliefs are at best a pipe dream in the sky. It has so many holes that it is difficult to argue with people who cannot see things from the Spirit's point of view. For starters, there is not single promise to Israel in the NT. That alone should tell you that God is not interested in raising up a nation that would crucify the Lord of glory all over again if they could.

I think your bias betrays you. How do you know what today's generation or the generations of tomorrow would do?

If you don't believe in historic events, how do you expect us to believe in a fleshly dream that will never take place?

As I (and others) said in an earlier post, I've never seen any preterist account for many things written in Revelation and prophecy. Who was the beast? who was the false prophet? what was the mark of the beast? what was the AOD? You've not made an account of history that covers prophecy for anyone to believe.

Lastly, who celebrates the death of 1.1 million Jews that died at the hands of the Romans?

The preterists that believe that the 70AD destruction was "part of the gospel and neccesary for the new covenant to take effect". (by wrongly interpreting Heb 9:8)

 

[tourist]

Hebrews 9.28
So Christ was once offered for the sins of many and unto them that look for Him shall He appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

That is indeed a biblical reference in regard to the second coming of Jesus.

 

[SomeDisciple]

That is indeed a biblical reference in regard to the second coming of Jesus.

Indeed it is: so unless "unto salvation" means "to wipe out Jerusalem", how can that be about 70AD?

 

[tourist]

Indeed it is: so unless "unto salvation" means "to wipe out Jerusalem", how can that be about 70AD?

Revelation is not about 70 AD. Throughout the OT Jerusalem was besieged, destroyed, looted, etc. quite a few times. The events of 70 AD are nothing but a footnote in historical journals. Many prophecies still have to be fulfilled before the second coming of Jesus as stated in Revelation and the other prophetic books.

 

[SomeDisciple]

That "without reference to sin"... I don't know what business those translations have adding "reference to" but it context it seems pretty obvious that "bearing sin" is being contrasted with "without sin"- as if to say "when he comes back, it's not to suffer again".

Trying to say "salvation-without reference to sin" as if to say "he will save our lives from these mean ol' Jews"... no. Paul would that he was ACCURSED FROM CHRIST for the sake of Israel. Think on that. He did not count his life as precious. He didn't want to be saved from Jews... he wanted the Jews saved.

 

[oyster67]

Revelation is all about the destruction of Jerusalem when the Romans invaded Jerusalem back in the first century. You are a bit over 2,000 years too late. 😂

I see. Learn something new every day.

 

[oyster67]

Revelation 21

1And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. 4And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

 

[Evmur]

So, while preterists will say that the jews from generations past ensured that their nation can never be redeemed, others might say that Jesus' fulfillment of the OC guarantees that Israel as a nation will eventually be redeemed.

I've not seen any convincing theology or understanding of prophecy from a preterist point of view... only a sick celebration and veneration of the slaughter of Jews.

You believe in a people of flesh whom Paul said was destined to perish unless they believed in the Lord. In Romans 9:8, that the children of the flesh (national Israel) were not the children of God, but the children of the promise (those who were born of God's Spirit and who had believed in Jesus as their Messiah).

Your futuristic beliefs are at best a pipe dream in the sky. It has so many holes that it is difficult to argue with people who cannot see things from the Spirit's point of view. For starters, there is not single promise to Israel in the NT. That alone should tell you that God is not interested in raising up a nation that would crucify the Lord of glory all over again if they could.

If you don't believe in historic events, how do you expect us to believe in a fleshly dream that will never take place? Lastly, who celebrates the death of 1.1 million Jews that died at the hands of the Romans? Who celebrates the death of six million Jews who died at the hands of Hitler? Who????

What hellish lies have you been reading?

Preterism is a mishmash. It's biggest problem is that the things it talks about didn't happen.

 

[FreeGrace2]

MISSION-IMPOSSIBLE said:
Revelation is all about the destruction of Jerusalem when the Romans invaded Jerusalem back in the first century. You are a bit over 2,000 years too late. 😂

I see. Learn something new every day.

I guess we should just tear all of Revelation 20 out of our inaccurate Bibles then.

 

[tourist]

I see. Learn something new every day.

I do too, but unfortunately nothing new to be learned in this thread.

 

[tourist]

MISSION-IMPOSSIBLE said:
Revelation is all about the destruction of Jerusalem when the Romans invaded Jerusalem back in the first century. You are a bit over 2,000 years too late. 😂

I guess we should just tear all of Revelation 20 out of our inaccurate Bibles then.

Yeah, since Revelation is irrelevant mind as well use it as toilet paper. On second thought, maybe not.

 

[MISSION-IMPOSSIBLE]

Preterism is a mishmash. It's biggest problem is that the things it talks about didn't happen.

The mishmash is a theology that ignores the direct recipients of the letters/epistles and nicely put them in the future as if the writers of such epistles were lying to their readers because it’s all about us folks.

At best these beliefs are the result of very poor reading understanding because the object of the prophesies are completely ignored and replaced by the never-land theology of the far future. At worst is a 200 year old cult.