|
Post by guidemeLord on Jul 25, 2003 0:29:11 GMT -5
I found this site: ;D I found this site: www.bible.ca/H-Mt-24-destruction-jerusalem-70AD.htmVery interesting quotes from some early writers. Does anyone know how to find these references they are using? Here are some samples: 160AD Clement of Alexandria (On the Significance of the A.D.70) "Whence also Peter, in his Preaching, speaking of the apostles, says: ‘But we, unrolling the books of the prophets which we possess, who name Jesus Christ, partly in parables, partly in enigmas, partly expressly and in so many words, find His coming and death, and cross, and all the rest of the tortures which the Jews inflicted on Him, and His resurrection and assumption to heaven previous to the capture of Jerusalem. As it is written, Thae things are all that He behooves to suffer, and what should be after Him. Recognizing them, therefore, we have believed in God in consequence of what is written respecting Him.’ " (Miscellanies 4:15)160AD Clement of Alexandria (On Matthew 24:15, The Abomination of Desolation) "We have still to add to our chronology the following, -- I mean the days which Daniel indicates from the desolation of Jerusalem, the seven years and seven months of the reign of Vespasian. For the two years are added to the seventeen months and eighteen days of Otho, and Galba, and Vitellius; and the result is three years and six months, which is "the half of the week," as Daniel the prophet said. For he said that there were two thousand three hundred days from the time that the abomination of Nero stood in the holy city, till its destruction. For thus the declaration, which is subjoined, shows: "How long shall be the vision, the sacrifice taken away, the abomination of desolation, which is given, and the power and the holy place shall be trodden under foot? And he said to him, Till the evening and morning, two thousand three hundred days, and the holy place shall be taken away." … "These two thousand three hundred days, then, make six years four months, during the half of which Nero held sway, and it was half a week; and for a half, Vespasian with Otho, Galba, and Vitellius reigned. And on this account Daniel says, "Blessed is he that cometh to the thousand three hundred and thirty-five days." For up to these days was war, and after them it ceased. And this number is demonstrated from a subsequent chapter, which is as follows: "And from the time of the change of continuation, and of the giving of the abomination of desolation, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and thirty-five days." " (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, p. 334)What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by Shirley on Jul 25, 2003 7:14:51 GMT -5
Did you read any of the rest of this site? They totally deny the power of God! Everything from all miracles have ceased to satan has been bound a thousand years. Well, guess what? If satan was bound in the first century for 1000 years, that time is up. According to what I read, satan and his minions have no influence on man, unless you step into his tiny circle where he is chained. Its hard to believe anything they say. If they say God no longer works miracles, He simply lts natural laws do their job, what would be the point of praying for someone when they are sick? They further state that any modern day miracles are false. In other words, God just doesn't do that anymore. I'm sorry, but I have to reject all they have to say on any subject based on their denying the very power of my God! Shirley
|
|
|
Post by parousia70 on Jul 25, 2003 8:17:36 GMT -5
SJudy,
I looked at the rest of the site as you suggested but I find nothing to indicate that they deny the power of God. Could you cite the specific text on their site you are referring to that leads you to that conclusion? Seems to me that preaching the binding of Satan is indeed AFFIRMING the power of God, not denying it, while preaching an undefeated Satan is the view that denies Christ's current victory.
Next, Satan has no power today OVER BELIEVERS. Satan is powerless to prevent people from Salvation. He has been forever defeated.
You seem to be suggesting that one day unbelievers will share in Christs victory over Satan.
Is this what you are saying?
|
|
|
Post by parousia70 on Jul 25, 2003 8:23:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Shirley on Jul 25, 2003 9:06:15 GMT -5
SJudy, I looked at the rest of the site as you suggested but I find nothing to indicate that they deny the power of God. Could you cite the specific text on their site you are referring to that leads you to that conclusion? Seems to me that preaching the binding of Satan is indeed AFFIRMING the power of God, not denying it, while preaching an undefeated Satan is the view that denies Christ's current victory. Next, Satan has no power today OVER BELIEVERS. Satan is powerless to prevent people from Salvation. He has been forever defeated. You seem to be suggesting that one day unbelievers will share in Christs victory over Satan. Is this what you are saying? I'm not suggesting anything. Above are quotes from the site.
|
|
|
Post by parousia70 on Jul 25, 2003 14:23:52 GMT -5
SJudy, thanks for those quotes. I stand with you in refutation of cessationism.
These errors of cessationism on their part do not nullify the present defeat of Satan however.
Satan is powerless today. You seemd to be suggesting he is not. I apologize if I was mistaken on that point.
In His present Victory, P70
|
|
|
Post by Shirley on Jul 25, 2003 15:43:33 GMT -5
SJudy, thanks for those quotes. I stand with you in refutation of cessationism. These errors of cessationism on their part do not nullify the present defeat of Satan however. Satan is powerless today. You seemd to be suggesting he is not. I apologize if I was mistaken on that point. In His present Victory, P70 Apology accepted I know satan has no power, when we know its him acting. Many are held in prison by him, not knowing that the door is unlocked! So they sit in their cell. In that sense he still holds the power over them. Most are not even aware that all they have to do is open the door and walk out (so to speak). So I guess his power is in persuasion. God Bless, Shirley
|
|
|
Post by guidemeLord on Jul 26, 2003 18:00:29 GMT -5
Thanks P70, I appreciated the link!!
|
|
|
Post by guidemeLord on Jul 26, 2003 18:41:31 GMT -5
Quote from site on original post : "The real purpose of New Testament miracles was to show that Christ and his inspired Apostles were speaking by divine authority. (Mark 16:19-20; Hebrews 2:3,, A fact once proven is always proven. After the inspired teachings which make up our New Testament were confirmed by the miracles of the First Century, they stand proven forever. The Bible teaches that we must now simply study the written accounts of these miracles in order to be convinced of the truthfulness of the Bible. (John 20:30-31). Modern-day miracles, therefore, are simply not needed in this age. (Luke 16:27-31).
D. Demon possession was listed as one of the signs that the apostles would do to confirm the writing of the New Testament: Mark 16:16-18. Spiritual gifts ceased with the completion of the Bible: 1 Cor 13:8-10 <100AD
E. Since God has not provided us with any further instruction about how to cast out demons other than fasting, prayer and saying, "be gone", nothing beyond this would be needed today if the phenomenon still existed! The movie, "The exorcist" is pure fiction with no basis in the Bible.I'm not suggesting anything. Above are quotes from the site.I looked up the verses they refer to and the interpretation could be taken as they say. They are not denying that there is no power of God but that satan has no power over a born-again christian. But I do disagree with the spiritual gifts and miracles having failed or ceased. God takes care of His people which is a miracle in itself. But again you could interpret those verses that way and I don't think the site is being dogmatic about it. The site simply claims that casting out demons as in the exorcist is not needed today because satan is defeated. Faith the size of a mustard seed is all it takes for a christian to lay hold of the power of God.... Did that make sense?
|
|
|
Post by Shirley on Jul 26, 2003 19:38:10 GMT -5
I looked up the verses they refer to and the interpretation could be taken as they say. They are not denying that there is no power of God but that satan has no power over a born-again christian. But I do disagree with the spiritual gifts and miracles having failed or ceased. God takes care of His people which is a miracle in itself. But again you could interpret those verses that way and I don't think the site is being dogmatic about it. The site simply claims that casting out demons as in the exorcist is not needed today because satan is defeated. Faith the size of a mustard seed is all it takes for a christian to lay hold of the power of God.... Did that make sense? No, it doesn't. They claim that God no longer works miracles. Period. They are no longer needed and He allows natural processes to unfold. He doesn't act in healings and other miracles. And the reference to casting out demons is quite clear. It states "IF the phenomon still existed". That is denying it! It calls the Excorcist a fable. The movie with Linda Blair was very fictionalized. But it was based on a true story that occurred in the 40's. Written by a priest who was there. It was about a young boy, not a teen girl. To deny the power of God, or the working of God, is to make Him very inaccessable. What is the point of praying to that kind of God? He won't do anything about your circumstances anyway. He doesn't work like that anymore. He did once, but He changed.
|
|
|
Post by guidemeLord on Jul 27, 2003 3:36:56 GMT -5
No, it doesn't. They claim that God no longer works miracles. Period. They are no longer needed and He allows natural processes to unfold. He doesn't act in healings and other miracles. And the reference to casting out demons is quite clear. It states "IF the phenomon still existed". That is denying it! It calls the Excorcist a fable. The movie with Linda Blair was very fictionalized. But it was based on a true story that occurred in the 40's. Written by a priest who was there. It was about a young boy, not a teen girl. To deny the power of God, or the working of God, is to make Him very inaccessable. What is the point of praying to that kind of God? He won't do anything about your circumstances anyway. He doesn't work like that anymore. He did once, but He changed. Shirley, My post was not meant to defend them but rather to say that there interpretation is not biblical heresy. There are many Churches that proclaim the Gifts of the Holy Spirit and Demon possession are only apostolical in nature and are not in effect now. Some churches believe that there are some gifts that are not in use now and some that are. I don't think that is against the Bible, but rather it is against our own experiences. I hope you understand that if you find that heretical or unbiblical because of your own experiences and ones you have heard and witnessed then you would disagree with some perfectly "normal" christian churches. Here is the website (http://www.ihcc.org/) of one and their Adobe tracts of the rundown on the spiritual gifts. This view of that site's shouldn't hinder you from recieving from information any more than from another denomination. That is all I was trying to say.
|
|
|
Post by parousia70 on Jul 27, 2003 12:51:22 GMT -5
Good point GML, the error Cessationism is not at all unique to preterists. Futurists have fallen into that error as well, in far greater numbers than preterists I might add.
Therefore, a futurist using one preterist group's adhearance to cessationism as proof that preterism is false, is nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black.
|
|
|
Post by larrygn on Aug 8, 2003 10:29:26 GMT -5
I think that Clement was prone to use his current times to relate to the positions of the Bible, just as many are now, thinking that the "rapture" will be during their life time, instead of understanding history in its fullness. Clement may have been a theologican, but was not a historian, and did not know the full history of the times from Moses on, with the expections of what he could get from the Bible. Without looking at the big picture, he could not see the full effect. Larry
|
|
|
Post by guidemeLord on Aug 8, 2003 11:15:44 GMT -5
I think that Clement was prone to use his current times to relate to the positions of the Bible, just as many are now, thinking that the "rapture" will be during their life time, instead of understanding history in its fullness. Clement may have been a theologican, but was not a historian, and did not know the full history of the times from Moses on, with the expections of what he could get from the Bible. Without looking at the big picture, he could not see the full effect. Larry Very Correct Larry, and great point! My Pastor.. A pre-mill, rapture believer even tells us that n order to properly interpret prophecy you must study history... Prophecy is only revealed with the pkmtyolping of the prophecy. Of course, he forgets about that when speaking about Revelation.. but I love him just the same! So truly without looking at the big picture, history of Israel, one may understand the prophecies to be future even as early as those in Clement's day. And if the church follows one set of Leaders, the theory or understanding of prophecy would carry through with verbal tradition to modern times, as has happened with the futuristic view of Revelation.
|
|
|
Post by larrygn on Aug 8, 2003 14:26:16 GMT -5
vinsight4u: don't you really need to look at this in the light of John's frame of mind. John was either in a trance, or was phsyically taken to view the events of the future ( which is a point for great discussion I shall not begin ). What John saw is unknown. Did he see writings from the future, which exagerated things, and showed such things as all the earth bowing in the name of the Lord, and heretics being burned at the stake, or drawn and quartered, even if it did not happen in fact, as would explain the situation with the 2 who restore the faith, they might not have died violently in fact, but they had terrible persecutions on paper. John reports this in light of his 1st century understanding when there is no written word, or even painted art, so to him, it is real. We seem to fall into the mistake the church of the 1st century AD did. Why believe the Messiah if he is not what you want? Why believe the church today, when it is not what we think it should be, all cloaked in purist while, and desending from Heaven. God does things in his manner, and allows us to think, and use our minds, so that he knows we want to do his will, just are not blind followers. Larry
|
|