Know about the preterist view?

Hate to say that I was not familiar with this term.

http://www.gotquestions.org/preterist.ht...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism

Is that related to the concepts of the preterite and the elect?

Preterist view is all has been fulfulled in Christ within the New Covenant. Now we are waiting to meet Christ at the end of our earthly life for judgement and eternal destination.

I heard a little about this and I can not follow their logic. The Bible tells us that when Jesus returns the earth and heavens will pass away.

You don't have a clue on how complicated the subject matter is, but how important it is to get it right. I had to look the word up (expressing past action or state) Yes, Jesus was in the past and set the rules to live with His Father in His kingdom so that we would be on the right side of the fence when Jesus come's back. If you Haven't had your sins forgiven before Jesus comes back it is not what you want, because then it will be to late. http://www.google.com/profiles/109344174...

Yes! If you don't get this right, you will go to Hell. It is very important! The most important religious decision you can make is whether you are a pre- a- or post-millenialist. Choose wisely! Heaven depends on your choice.

So you're saying that we're going to be tested on this?

That's right! and if you choose wrongly you will burn forever in the fires of Hell. Don't blow it!

Will the test be multiple choice?

As I understood the question, there are only two choices. 50/50. Good luck. I plan to look over Gene's shoulder to copy his answer.

> 10 I think it's definitely a pop quiz, inasmuch as "No man knoweth the day or the hour ... " ;)

Sheesh, and I coulda thought he came by the other day.

Maybe that was just a hungry, thirsty, naked, ill, imprisoned stranger and not him after all.

>13
If he was hungry, thirsty, naked, ill, and imprisoned, it was probably Satan. A bit too obvious for Christ in these in-between times, I think. And what are the odds of one guy suffering from all of those indignities at once (except in Texas, of course)?

Os.

Message edited by its author, Oct 13, 2009, 1:39am.

Ah, Texas.

That's God's Country.

You just need to read Scripture, which I am surprised more of you don't do in a Christian group like this:

2 Peter 3:

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. 11 Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will umelt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

Scripture tells us what the Rapture will bring. The Lord leaves no doubt about what will happen, so anyone who says they don't understand just needs to read His Word.

The Kingdom is near and we should rejoice in His Promise.

turpentine,

Thanks for clarifying everything. It is always good to have someone with the answers.

Richard

You are welcome. I am surprised that so many Christians debate His word when it is so easy to check on His plan by just reading Scripture.

I watch this discussion with some interest for my writing, and I don't wish to cause a stir, yet...I am perplexed by the complete acceptance of a book not even put to paper for two-hundred years after the 'events' took place, and only then in languages that are not easily translated, unless one is a scholar in those languages. Having read some of the scholarly research (not being fluent in any way, with the original languages), I have found that it is apparent to many of the researchers that the current bible does not resemble the original texts. They also share that the texts were written by scribes, some of whom were not great spellers, and some of whom altered texts to fit the then-current religious climate.

A series of books, written almost a century ago, and put to paper and ink within twenty years of the events, states that Christ has not left us and is still among us, by a man who states that he and others in the research party met him. How can it be, then, that this series of books, The Life and Teaching of the Masters of the Far East would be less important than one written two-hundred years after an event, with misquotes, overt alterations, etcetera? I have no wish to offend and, from the perspective of many, the question begs an answer.

Merci

Message edited by its author, Oct 24, 2009, 11:43am.

"The most important religious decision you can make is whether you are a pre- a- or post-millenialist."

Obvious sarcasm.

I know it's almost cliche, but it doesn't get any simpler:

God loved the world so much that He gave His only begotten Son, that WHOEVER BELIVES IN HIM should not perish but have everlasting life.

Matthew 16:28
The world as they knew it did pass away within that generation with the fall of Jerusalem and the temple.

I am perplexed by the complete acceptance of a book not even put to paper for two-hundred years after the 'events' took place.

The current consensus, accepted by virtually all scholars, Christian and non-Christian, is that the four Gospels were composed much closer to the events than that--though obviously exactly how close is a matter of much dispute. It seems to me that you are either relying on inaccurate hearsay or books long out of date. Google the subject for a quick introduction to the state of current knowledge.

Message edited by its author, Oct 24, 2009, 3:39pm.

Paul's undisputed letters within 20 years and the main gospel sources not much later than that. Apparently KJ is pointing to the canonization process, but even with that the dating is off.

I do not understand the reference to the Masters of the Far East. Probably because I have not read it.

I also do not understand the specifics of the statement, " it is apparent to many of the researchers that the current bible does not resemble the original texts" Perhaps a reference to the specific researchers would help clarify.

> 20.

I think it's easier to have angst about the future, from the personal to the cosmic, and harder to trust, specifically to trust in Christ, with elements of mystery and uncertainty in one's own knowing.

I thought that was what Christian faith was: trusting God, trusting in Christ complete with elements of mystery and uncertainty in one's knowing, but trusting anyway.

22 & 23> The first that comes to mind, is: Bart D. Ehrman's book, Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why published in 2005, which would not make this an 'older' research volume. He also studied the original languages, and was therefore able to read the original texts that were available to him. This would place him in the category of 'current researchers' without a doubt.

And, yes, richardbsmith, I did see your review of Ehrman's book. If spirituality & God are of interest to you, as reading material, you might try the The Life and Teaching of the Masters of the Far East The initial five volumes are very interesting. The sixth volume was published posthumously, and provides insight into the author and the expedition. For me, they provide a much clearer teaching of the principles of Jesus Christ, and our purpose on earth. You will find an interesting meeting with Christ, in the third volume, but I strongly suggest that you not leap ahead, when reading the five volumes. You would lose much, if you did so.

A minor point - I do not think I have reviewed any books by Bart Ehrman, and unfortunately I have not purchased yet the Misquoting Jesus book, though I do plan to get it.

One thing I found surprising when reading a lot of Paul is how much the Gospels share the same theology as Paul's letters. I take this to mean two things with regard to the Gospel's. One, they were mostly written for the benefit of those converts who were not familiar with the message, and two, they were written to support Paul's theology against some of the competing theologies of the time. Remember, Luke, the putative author of one of the gospels traveled with Paul for some time. I'm sure his gospel conforms closely to Paul's message. Jesus brought salvation, Paul created a religion.

27> You are correct, and another illustration for me that checking messages on LT in the wee hours is counterproductive. It was robrichards who did the critique.

I think you will find Ehrman's book interesting.