Uniform according to whole as that seen the temporal. . . along with the eternal unseen a good mix.
Re-read that.
No, they are not.
If exegetical precepts were correctly applied that verse 1) would not be proof-texted and 2) not made to say things it does not say.
Yes, they do. So too do all the words in the Bible in all the literary forms found in the Bible and the rules of exegesis help us read them all, understand them all, and apply them - even when it comes to millennial views.
How is that specifically relevant to this specific op?
How is that specifically relevant to this specific op?
This statement from you would ring more true if you had not mentioned that you yourself lean upon Augustine for many of your eschatological views. Augustine is also an "extra-biblical source".
Daniel foretold events, all of which have become a fulfilled history lesson to us in our day. Since Peter said that "the end of all things is at hand" in his own days of writing 1 Peter 4:7, that "end" came and went almost 2,000 years ago.
I do not lean upon Augustine, though his exposition of Revelation twenty is spot on! I believe it before I ever read his article of Revelation 20.
Keep talking and you soon will be reclassified as a full blown preteriast.
Sorry my writing skills suffer. I was trying to introduce the tool given to help us walk by faith (the unseen) eternal things .Mixing the things seen the tempoal dying mankind to the unseen things of the mysteries made known through parables. I would call the prescription that is given the golden measure of faith. Gold representing the unseen work of God (2 Corinthians 4:18 ). Gold is the only corrupted rudiment of this world that God puts his good stamp of approval
What is the subject of this op?
And I do not have to lean upon extra-biblical sources such as Josephus, Tacitus, Seneca, etc, although their descriptions of historical events matching scripture content are "spot on".
I've never understood the compulsion to classify everyone into one set group or another. Generalizations (which we all do on occasion) often do an injustice to the wide variations we all have when it comes to understanding scripture. And I'm not sure why my one reference to a clear statement by Peter about "the end of all things" being "at hand" for the time then present should seem to be offensive to you. It's a plain statement.
But I agree that Matthew 24 is all one main subject, and have told you so before on our other website. All of it was fulfilled back in the first century generation. And you and I have gone back and forth about the definition of "this generation" before, with you being unable to explain why Christ "suffering many things" and being "rejected of this generation" did not mean the first-century generation of Jews who did not receive Him when He came among them as the incarnate Son of God.
This post itself is entirely directed at the OP (original poster), and as such, contains derogatory personal comments about them. And it is off topic. Your posts up to this point have been about the use of the word "method". You are right, I will not engage with those posts nor should I. If you want to post on the subject of any of the "mils" or interpretive categories, I may engage with those posts. But anymore like this and they will be deleted. All that is behind us and over.
I agree it is better than the original creation in which we were created corruptible but not yet corrupt. In the new heaven and earth Christ has attained for us incorruptibility and immortality, and the creation itself, and there will be nothing corrupt in it to corrupt us. Impossible to imagine, but I persevere by His power and preservation, towards Home.
Agreed.
Not precisely true. Idealism says they are literal events depicted in symbolic form. And they see the visions including the judgements not as chronological and separate but as repeated patterns occurring throughout the time period of Christ's resurrection and second coming, seen from different perspectives, culminating in His return and judgement and the new heaven and new earth.
I'm curious. That statement about God finally purifying the planet entirely is more of a Postmillennial Dominionist point of view. I'm wondering if @Arial shares the perspective 3R has posted (Post #70 isn't clear).
Does that apply to the purifying of the planet? Is the purification literal or symbolic?
Really........ based who's determination? Yours?
Let me make sure I am understanding that correctly.
Do you know any Christian here in this thread who claims not to do that?
How is that relevant to this op?
Yep. I do not know anyone who disagrees with that sentence.
In my experience conversing with RB, (who claims the position of an Amil-Idealist) the exact opposite seems to be true. Literal terms are mainly used to depict symbolic, spiritual realities in the way he explains prophetic passages. And please jump in here, @RB, if I am presenting your position in error. I don't mean to be talking behind your back on this. And also granted, RB may not be an example of the typical Amil-Idealist, for all I know.
I am not speaking of the NHNE, which was already put in place back in AD 70. The conditions in both heaven and earth appreciably changed back then, as Hebrews 12:26 said God had "NOW" promised to do in the "shaking" process that would take place in that generation. The final purification of this planet in the future of any remaining spiritual evil will be accomplished when all HUMAN evil is purged from the globe. This will be accomplished in the saints' final, third resurrection event with its final judgment of mankind. The physical planet itself is not composed of anything evil, and needs no purification. And the Satanic realm has already been dealt with back in the first century by its complete eradication , as God promised to do in several scripture prophetic passages. So we are not waiting for that to occur.
I am neither, since I believe the Revelation 20 millennium was speaking of a literal thousand years of Satan's deception being bound, which finished with the First Resurrection in AD 33 of Christ and the 144,000 First-fruits resurrected Matthew 27:52-53 saints. By my understanding of the term (which could be flawed), an Idealist would assign too many of the prophetic scripture into the strictly symbolic category, when they were quite literally fulfilled in real time historical events in the past.
RB, years ago I printed off a copy of the post from GCF where you and I exchanged our views on what "this generation" meant. And you did not have a response on the point of "this generation" causing Christ to "suffer many things" and be "rejected" by "this generation". But of course, we should take that to another post if you decide to start one on that theme alone.
Would you say Revelation should be read literally where the text is meant to be read literally, and it should be read allegorically where it is meant to be read allegorically, and read anagogically where it is mean to be read anagogically?
"Reduced"?
I am very familiar with Augustine, the various eschatological positions he took over the course of his lifetime and his books (including "The City of God"). I am curious about the mention of "The City of God " because there are only two places in the entire book where Augustine mentions Revelation (once in chapter 7 and again in chapter 13 of Book 20) and neither report is specifically Idealist. Thoroughly Amillennial, but not Idealist.
I completely agree.
That's a new one for me. The truth of the matter concerning interpretations of Revelation, even though they are given specific named, most people in figuring it have a positional starting point and work it out with many differing conclusions that align with this and that. When it comes to Matt 24 (which I don't really want to get into in depth)Jesus is not always talking about the same things. Sometimes it directly relates to when no stone is left standing, and sometimes end times and His second coming. Verses 19-20 would be referring to 70 a.d. in that case.
I disagree with most of that paragraph as I find no scriptural evidence for it and none is given. But will address this from the idealist perspective. In Rev when it speaks of Satan being bound for a thousand years it qualifies it. He was bound from deceiving the nations. And he is obviously still active in the world. So from deceiving the nations deals with the gospel going to the nations and satan not being allowed to stop that. And since he cannot stop the spread of the gospel, he cannot stop Jesus' sheep from being gathered. In addition, all believers are sealed in Christ and cannot be taken out of His hand. The thousand years then would be the church age---or from the resurrection until satan is unbound for a short time, that is, allowed to deceive the nations. And this is shortly before Christ's second coming, and will bring in a time of persecution of Christians by governments, such as has not been seen before. And then satan is destroyed, all the wicked with him, Jesus returns, and we arrive at the new heaven and the new earth.
My mistake. My regrets. I got you confused with Red. You may ignore Post 72.
Not very many at all are willing to consider this point of a past eradication of the Satanic realm, even from a presentation of the scriptures about it. At any rate, it's a subject that doesn't really belong on the theme of this post, which is why I didn't carry that point any further.
The heart of fallen mankind in its natural state is capable of deceiving itself and others without any assistance whatever from the Satanic realm being present in the world. Christ made that very clear in Mark 7:21. "For, from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, ...deceit, lasciviousness..." etc.. Those who have no belief in human depravity would deny this fact. Even believers can be deluded and can deceive others (as "deceiving your own selves").
Thank God for the surety of this...
That is not the given order of events in Revelation 20 for the millennium. The millennium ends with the "First Resurrection", which was that of Christ and the Matt. 27:52-53 resurrected saints in AD 33. The Matthew 27:52-53 saints were the Revelation 20:5 "remnant of the dead" which "lived again" when the millennium was finished. This event of the "remnant of the dead" coming to life again was called the "First resurrection". They were the group of "First-fruits" to be raised from the grave: all 144,000 of them who came out of Jewish graves broken open around Jerusalem after Christ's resurrection as the "First-fruits".
