Online Bible and Study Tools
Translate || Vine / Schaff || Alts/Vars/Criticism/Aramaic

 
 


End Times Chart


Introduction and Key

BOOKS:  BIBLICAL STUDIES (1500BC-AD70) / EARLY CHRISTIAN PRETERISM (AD50-1000) / FREE ONLINE BOOKS (AD1000-2008)


AD70 Dispensationalism: According to that view, AD70 was the end of 'this age' and the start of the 'age to come'.    Those who lived before AD70 could only 'see in part' and such, lacking the resurrection and redemptive blessings which supposedly came only when Herod's Temple in Jerusalem fell.    Accordingly, AD70 was not only the end of Old Testament Judaism, but it was also the end of the revelation of Christianity as seen in the New Testament.

HYPER PRETERISM

"Full preterist" material is being archived for balanced representation of all preterist views, but is classified under the theological term hyper (as in beyond the acceptable range of tolerable doctrines) at this website.  The classification of all full preterism as Hyper Preterism (HyP) is built upon well over a decade of intense research at PreteristArchive.com, and the convictions of the website curator (a former full preterist pastor).  The HyP theology of final resurrection and consummation in the fall of Jerusalem, with its dispensational line in AD70 (end of old age, start of new age), has never been known among authors through nearly 20 centuries of Christianity leading up to 1845, when the earliest known full preterist book was written.  Even though there may be many secondary points of agreement between Historical/Modern Preterism and Hyper Preterism, their premises are undeniably and fundamentally different.

WARNING: THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL HAS BEEN CLASSIFIED AS "HYPER PRETERIST"



Systematic Hyper Preterism
(aka "Full Preterism")



Study Archive

Jesus: "It is finished" (AD30)
cf. Hebrews 10:19-22

Click For Site Updates Page

Free Online Books Page

Historical Preterism Main

Modern Preterism Main

Hyper Preterism Main

Preterist Idealism Main

Critical Article Archive Main

Church History's Preteristic Presupposition

Study Archive Main

Dispensationalist dEmEnTiA  Main

Josephus' Wars of the Jews Main

Online Study Bible Main

Hyper Preterism: Defining "Hyper Preterism"- Criticisms from the Inside - Criticisms from the Outside || Progressive Pret | Regressive Pret | Former Full Preterists | Pret Scholars | Normative Pret | Reformed Pret | Pret Idealism | Pret Universalism

William Bell
Max King
Don Preston
Larry Siegle
Kurt Simmons
Ed Stevens
 

SOME DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES OF SYSTEMATIZED HYPER PRETERISM

It is important to keep in mind that many ideas and doctrines full preterism appeals to - such as the complete end of the Old Covenant world in AD70 - are by no means distinctive to that view.   Many non HyPs believe this as well, so one need not embrace the Hyper Preterist system in order to endorse this view.   Following are exceptional doctrines which, so far as I've seen, are only taught by adherents of Hyper Preterism.:

DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES TAUGHT BY STANDARD FULL PRETERISM

  • All Bible Prophecy was Fulfilled By AD70

  • Atonement Incomplete at Cross ; Complete at AD70

  • The Supernatural Power of Evil Ended in AD70

  • The Spirit of Antichrist was Destroyed in AD70

  • "The Consummation of the Ages" Came in AD70

  • "The Millennium" is in the Past, From AD30 to AD70

  • Nothing to be Resurrected From in Post AD70 World ; Hades Destroyed

  • The Christian Age Began in AD70 ; Earth Will Never End

  • "The Day of the Lord" was Israel's Destruction ending in AD70

  • The "Second Coming" of Jesus Christ Took Place in AD70-ish

  • The Great Judgment took place in AD70 ; No Future Judgment

  • The Law, Death, Sin, Devil, Hades, etc. Utterly Defeated in AD70

  • "The Resurrection" of the Dead and Living is Past, Having Taken Place in AD70

  • The Context of the Entire Bible is Pre-AD70 ; Not Written To Post AD70 World

DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES TAUGHT BY VARIOUS FORMS
(under construction)

  • Baptism was for Pre-AD70 Era (Cessationism)

  • The Lord's Prayer was for Pre-AD70 Era (Cessationism)

  • The Lord's Supper was for Pre-AD70 Era (Cessationism)

  • The Holy Spirit's Paraclete Work Ceased in AD70 (Cessationism)

  • The Consummation in AD70 Caused Church Offices to Cease (Cessationism)

  • The Resurrection in AD70 Changed the "Constitutional Principle" of Marriage (Noyesism)

  • Israel and Humanity Delivered into Ultimate Liberty in AD70 (TransmillennialismTM)

  • The Judgment in AD70 Reconciled All of Mankind to God ; All Saved (Preterist Universalism)

  • Adam's Sin No Longer Imputed in Post AD70 World ; No Need to be Born Again (Preterist Universalism)

  • When Jesus Delivered the Kingdom to the Father in AD70, He Ceased Being The Intermediary (Pantelism/Comprehensive Grace?)

  • The Book of Genesis is an Apocalypse; is About Creation of First Covenant Man, not First Historical Man (Covenantal Preterism)

 

  Just who is the Elijah-to-come?
(An Alternative View)

By MS Cheo., Singapore
(14 Jan 2004)

Almost every Christian believers, preterists and futurists alike, believe that John the Baptist is that Elijah-to-come, at least in his spirit and power. This is a no-brainer. However, many “futurist” believers also think that the actual prophesied Elijah will appear in the near future, before the yet-to-happen second coming of Jesus Christ. The only group I know of who does not consider John the Baptist to be the Elijah-to-come are the Jews – then and now. Every year during the Jewish Passover, by tradition, an empty chair is set for Elijah - a yearning for a type they never got to see for the past 2,000 years!

But why should we doubt and question whether John the Baptist was that Elijah-to-come? The Jews did recognize John to be the Messenger. Why they dod not accept that John the Baptist was also the Elijah-to-come? Are there not several no-brainer verses in the Bible confirming that John was the Elijah-to-come, such as Matt 11:7-10-14, Matt 17:9-10-13 and Luke 1:13-17?

Matt 11:7-10-14 And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, …. And if ye will receive [it], this is Elias, which was for to come.

Matt 17:9-10-13 …. And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come ,…. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

Luke 1:13-17 But the angel said unto him, …. and thou shalt call his name John. …. And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

Yet, John himself denied outright that he was that Elijah (John 1:21). He even asked Jesus a strange question almost 2,000 years ago – “Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?” not long after having proclaimed Jesus as the Son of God! As such, is there an inconsistency in prophecy and in God’s Word? Has Elijah already come 2,000 years ago? Was that in the person of John the Baptist? Is there yet to be another Elijah to come in the future? Could we have been wrong about this John-Elijah association all these thousand of years? The Truth shall set you free. I hope the below study will also set you thinking more deeply.


Why John the Baptist IS NOT the Elijah-to-come

All of us have been made to believe and to accept John the Baptist as the Elijah-to-come since we were babes in Christ. After all, most of us started with the readings of the 4 Gospels. Often, the description of John having “his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey” (Matt 3:4) was employed by many writers to make him look like the Elijah of old. But really, other than the “leathern girdle about his loins” (perhaps a common outfit then?), I see no other similarity with the Elijah of old. There is no mention of any “coat of camel's hair” in the whole of the Old Testament at all.

2Ki 1:8 And they answered him, [He was] an hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather about his loins. And he said, It [is] Elijah the Tishbite.

It does not state that Elijah wore coat of camel’s hair, but that he was a hairy man. While it was not revealed what Elijah had for his daily stable, but for three and a half years of famine, a period longer than the ministry of John the Baptist, Elijah was fed with bread and flesh [meat] by ravens and drink river-water, and thereafter, by a widow with cooked meals (and sustained by a miracle) – but totally no mention of locusts and honey.

1Ki 17:6 And the ravens brought him bread and flesh in the morning, and bread and flesh in the evening; and he drank of the brook. …
1Ki 17:9 Arise, get thee to Zarephath, which [belongeth] to Zidon, and dwell there: behold, I have commanded a widow woman there to sustain thee.

Also, Elijah performed many miracles that were unheard of in his time. John the Baptist performed no miracle! Jesus also said several times that such Elijah-to-come were to face severe sufferings, as much as Jesus Himself suffered.

Joh 10:41 And many resorted unto him (Jesus), and said, John did no miracle: but all things that John spake of this man were true.
 

Matt 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

The problem is that there is just no good record that they have done unto John the Baptist whatsoever they listed [wanted]. No record of him severely persecuted. No record of him stoned or even ridiculed. But we do know that John was a popular figure with the populace (Matt 3:5), and even with some groups of Pharisee and Sadducee who seek to be baptized by him. They knew who John was – the messenger, a voice crying in the wilderness preparing the way for the Lord. We know John was jailed by Herod the tetrarch. While in prison, he seems to have some liberty to be visited by his disciples. He was, in a way, respected by Herod!

Mar 6:20 For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.

As such, I doubt Herod would put John to much maltreatment, if any, while in prison. Perhaps the only recorded malevolence John suffered was he being swiftly beheaded by Herod who “was exceeding sorry” (Mar 6:26). And if likewise the Son of Man - Jesus - was to also “suffer of them”, was Jesus ever thrown into jail and be confined? Was Jesus beheaded? NO! Even if we consider the “them” to be the cohorts of Herod, Jesus did not really suffer under their persecution either.

There is simply no major similarity, whether in their works or of their personality between John the Baptist and Elijah at all! John the Baptist simply does not fit the prerequisite to be that prophesied Elijah-to-come! John knew it. He openly acknowledged that he was that messenger and he also openly denied he is the expected Elijah-to-come.

John 1:19-21 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him …. Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not.

We noted in Mal 4:5 below:

Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

Both Jesus and John appeared on the scene at about the same time. As John attained his 30th 'birthday' earlier being conceived 6 months before Jesus, John probably started his ministry 6 months earlier too. Jesus began His ministry after John was put into prison. And both began their ministry with the message, "Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." (Matt 3:2).

Mar 1:14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
Mar 1:15 And saying, The time IS fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

That essentially mean John's ministry was a very short 6 months period, just long enough for the Messenger to prepare the way for the Star of the New Testament whose ministry of almost 3 years was filled with miracles.

So, was it God's intention that the people be send an Elijah and be warned for the pending colossal disaster for only 6 short months - an Elijah that did not perform any miracles, even though he may have exhibited the spirit and (vocal?) power of Elijah? But Jesus did more than just in spirit and power!


John avowed he was not the Elijah-to-come

I believe the crux of the problem in identifying this prophesied Elijah is that we had been taught (or led) to associate the Messenger of Mal 3:1 and the Elijah-to-come of Mal 4:5 to be one and the same person! In a flash of a moment, it occurred to me that they could be 2 distinct persons. Further studies show me that these 2 distinct persons did come and faithfully complete their missions during the lifetime of Jesus!

Let look at these 2 verses.

Mal 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.

Mal 4:5-6 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

Note in Mal 4:5, the Elijah-to-come is to appear before “the great and dreadful day” – an event. But in Mal 3:1 the messenger is to prepare the way “before Me”, before the Lord - a Person - who shall come suddenly to His temple. And did the Lord appear? Right on time! Jesus did come to the temple many times that was then still standing in all its glory. And I am sure no one will have any problem in agreeing that this messenger is John the Baptist. Even John the Baptist acknowledged his calling:

John 1:23 He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias (referring to Isa 40:3).

John also knew he was living “in the last days” - as he shouted to the Pharisees and Sadducees, “who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” John knew who he was, and for what purpose he was born into the world to do – and did it! And he knew who he is NOT. He knew he is not the Elijah to come before that great and dreadful day of the Lord.

John 1:19-21 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

As far as the Jews in the first century were concerned, there were 3 other personalities prophesied to appear that have yet to appear (beside the Messenger in which John the Baptist had laid claim to and was accepted by the masses). Unfortunately, these 3 personalities they asked of in their question to John – the Christ, Elijah and “that Prophet” – are still being sought by the Jews today. The answers are in our New Testament, but then the bulk of the Jews today do not accept New Testament as part of their scriptures. “That Prophet” was prophesied by Moses in Deut 18:18.

Deu 18:18-19 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee [Moses], and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require [it] of him.

The Jews understood that “That Prophet” would be like Moses, who will institute new Laws and Commandments. And he has yet to appear since Moses’ death – as none of any preceding prophets had claimed to be one.

John the Baptist confessed that he was not the Christ, nor the Prophet, nor was he the Elijah-to-come. He should be the best person to know who he himself was. After all, John the Baptist was " filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb" (Luke 1:15) . He knew his own mission and he knew what he was talking about.

Some have argued that the reason John answered “no” to the question was because John thought that the Jews was asking whether he is the literal Elijah, or perhaps even a re-incarnated Elijah. I don’t think the argument is valid, a very weak one at most. John should be aware of the expectation of the Jews for the coming of these 3 personalities. His answer was in accordance to their expectation – asking for the same Elijah that was prophesied in the same “little” book of Malachi wherein he, as the messenger, was also prophesied.


The Elijah-to-come – Identified!

Perhaps, we better look elsewhere for another person, as John the Baptist himself also seek to then. It makes better sense why John the Baptist sent his disciples to ask Jesus whether He is the one prophesied to come (as John knew himself was not the one):

Matt 11:2-4 Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples, and said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another? Jesus answered and said unto them, Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see: …

Which of the 3 personalities was John asking Jesus of - the Christ, the Prophet or the Elijah-to-come? John already knew Jesus to be the Christ – he was the one who had baptized Jesus and saw the Spirit of God descending onto Jesus, and who had proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God (John 1:34) – the Messiah Christ who “taketh away the sins of the world”. John was not confused. It makes no sense for him to ask if Jesus is the Christ! So he could either be asking of the Prophet or the Elijah-to-come.

John knew that he was not the Elijah-to-come and had denied it point blank. (It is us who stubbornly refuse to accept his outright answer!) John was aware that the Elijah-to-come is someone else. It is possible also that the Prophet and the Elijah are 2 distinct persons, or is in one and the same person. And Jesus knew what John was asking, and with the answer given, which basically affirm that He [Jesus] is the “he that should come” using the series of miracles that He had performed. The disciples of John got their answer and return to tell John about it.

In short, Jesus was claiming to be the Elijah-to-come! Elijah was well known for his miracles. References to the Prophet (which are few) have no association with miracles. (However, of a truth, Jesus is also “that Prophet”, who did institute a New Covenant, but that was not the intent of His answer to John’s question.)

I believe John went peacefully with his eyes closed when he was beheaded not long after – knowing who the Christ and the Elijah-to-come were, and that he had accomplished his own mission on earth! He had proclaimed the message of “Repent ye, for the Kingdom of God is at hand”. He had given the knowledge of salvation unto his people for the remission of their sins. He had geared up an atmosphere where the people were eagerly looking the Messiah-Lord to come as in Mal 3:1 (and Luke 3:15). He had baptized Jesus to set Him ready for His ministry.

Mal 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.

Unfortunately, the people then did not recognize this “Lord” when He came suddenly to His temple and His people – “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” (John 1:11). They did not realize that the Lord-to-come [in Mal 3:1] is also the Elijah-to-come! [in Mal 4:6] They were looking for 2 distinct persons! (What irony. For the past many centuries, Christians had thought that the Messenger and the Elijah-to-come is one same person – when they are not.)

Wait a minute – are there not verses that said John the Baptist is that Elijah-to-come? Even Jesus seems to say so. Yes, unfortunately, it does seem so (as we fail to see from another perspective). In fact, I shall attempt to show that these verses further prove that Jesus was the Elijah-to-come, not John the Baptist! If since the first century, people had been mistaken about John the Baptist and Elijah, this same confusion had continued thereby blurring the (translation of the) Words of God. But the Truth will prevail and set us free.


Examining those “contradictory” verses (Matt 11:7-15)

Let go back to Matt 11 again and examine Jesus’ replies to John’s question.

Mat 11:3-6 And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another? Jesus answered and said unto them, Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear and see: The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them. And blessed is [he], whosoever shall not be offended in me.

Matt 11:7-10 And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind? But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft [clothing] are in kings' houses. But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet.

Matt 11:10 For this is [he], of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

As already pointed out, Jesus had just answered the question asked, that He is “he that should come” with the series of miracles performed, just like the Elijah of old. He was the one to come before that great and dreadful Day of the Lord, but first, He proclaimed the acceptable year of the Lord, as in Luke 4:18,19 and in Isa. 61:1,2, in which the latter part of Isa. 61 depicts that dreadful Day. In verse Matt 11:10, we have Jesus confirming to the masses that John was that messenger prophesied in Malachi who was to prepare the way for the Lord.

What about Matt 11:14 – did Jesus say that John is that Elijah? Let see.

Matt 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Matt 11:14 And if ye will receive [it], this is Elias, which was for to come.
Matt 11:15 He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

In verse 10, Jesus gave a direct confirmation that John is that messenger. But the way Jesus put it in verse 14 does not say explicitly that John is the Elijah – but more like "if you are willing or desire to believe, this is the Elijah to come". The word "will" in "If ye will receive [it]" is Strong #2309 and is defined as having the meaning of "to will, have in mind, intend, resolved, determined, purpose, desire, wish, etc." I am inclined to believe the reason Jesus precluded the phrase “And if ye will receive” stresses the point that it is either not factual or is hard to be believed, but nevertheless, “if you want to, go ahead and believe it”.

If the masses knew their scriptures, then they should know that the arrival of the Elijah, whoever he is, would also mean the soon coming of that “great and dreadful day of the Lord”. Now, it does make more sense why Jesus added the warning – “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” I think Jesus was not really that interested to identify Himself as that Elijah-to-come (they would not believe Him anyway), but was using the opportunity to warn the people of the coming wrath!

Also, the ‘this’ in “THIS is Elias” is Strong #846 (Greek “autos”), which is a reflexive pronoun (“self”) pointing back to the person or persons in context. It could be referring back to John as he was mentioned in the preceding verses, or it could be referring back to the personality being asked of in the original question, “Are you HE to come?”, which started the whole discourse. The word #846 has been translated as “he”, “her”, "himself", “they”, “them”, etc., in many instances. However, there are as many Bible translations which translate the phrase as “this is Elias” as there are with “he is Elias”. I am no Greek scholar, but perhaps there is a valid reason why some translators chose to use “this” instead of the more common “he”. Perhaps in the construct of that sentence, there is no preceding pronoun to reflect upon, hence "this" was used. As such, could it be reflexive upon the speaker Himself? Remember the original question asked, “Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?” Perhaps, expecting their unbelief to His answer, could Jesus thus uttered, “And if ye will receive it”, (and perhaps pointing to the very spot He was standing on), “this is Elias, which was for to come”? John the Baptist did not perform any major miracles (or at least it was not recorded), but Jesus had just given a list of it – a list that supercedes that of Elijah. And no one should really take offence for Him to claim “This is Elias who was for to come”


Examining those “contradictory” verses (Matt 17:9-13)

What about Matt 17:9-13? Did not the Jesus’ disciples understand that John the Baptist to be that Elijah (as in verse 13)?

Matt 17:9-10 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead. And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
Matt 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
Matt 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

Yes, the disciples did understand it to be such THEN – but wrongly! Matthew was just recording their understanding then, at that time. The disciples sometimes understood Jesus' sayings rightly, sometimes wrong and many a times they could not even arrive at any conclusions. The word “then” [Strong’s #5119] has the meaning of “at the time” or “that time”, according to Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionary. Thayer's lexicon defines it as "at the time the things under consideration were taking place". Unfortunately, the force of this word did not come through the way we now understand as “then”. It is ‘then’ as in at ‘that point in time’ and not ‘then’ as a resulted of a consequence (which is conveyed by another Greek word numbered as Strong's #3767. It was translated as “then”, "therefore", "so", "and" and a few others, which Thayer defines it as "used in drawing a conclusion and in connecting sentences together logically").

Mat 17:13 At that time, the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

There were other instances that the disciples did not understand, misunderstand or were unaware of the meanings and implications of Jesus’ sayings or doings – until the Spirit arrived to lead them into the truth.

John 12:16 These things understood not his disciples at the first: but when Jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these things were written of him, and [that] they had done these things unto him.

And there were instances that the disciples thought they understood the meanings and implications of Jesus’ sayings or doings and yet they were still wrong about it – until the Spirit arrived to lead them into the truth.

Mat 13:44,45,47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; … Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls: ... Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, …
Mat 13:51 Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.

Did the Disciples really understand the mysteries of the Kingdom of God? They said, "Yea, Lord". I don’t think so. Even to the very last minute, just before Jesus was to get caught up into Heaven, having promised them the Holy Spirit that is to come upon them to lead them to the Truth, the Disciples revealed their misunderstanding about the Kingdom of God that they had professed to have understood! They understood it as being a physical Kingdom even after Jesus had explained the parables to them!

Act 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time [now] restore again the kingdom to Israel?

In several instances when Jesus told the disciples that He will be delivered and suffered under the hands of man, those verses are followed by "the disciples understand not". (e.g. Mar 9:32, Luke 9:44, Luke 18:32) Likewise, I am not surprised that the disciples did not understand it also when Jesus declared that "That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed" in Matt 17:11 as well. They understood it to be John but in fact "they understoood not". And only Matthew chose to record their OWN (wrong) understanding then (at that time) on Jesus' reply. What the disciples understood THEN need not have to be taken as gospel truth. It was their understanding - they might have it correct, or they might have it wrong! After all, they were not filled with the Holy Spirit then.

Just read closely what Jesus had just told them and its implication - “That Elias is come already, and THEY KNEW HIM NOT” (compare John 1:10,11), “but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.” In short, the Son of man shall suffer whatever they desired and they knew Him not.

“They knew him not” - but how can the people know that John was that Elijah if John had blatantly denied it straight in their face, “I AM NOT”? Is that fair?

But what exactly had they “done unto him whatsoever they listed”? As already mentioned, we know John was a popular figure with the populace, and even with some groups of Pharisees and Sadducees. There is just no good record that they “have done unto him whatsoever they listed.” Is there any record of John the Baptist being severely persecuted? Stoned? Ridiculed? etc. None! Except perhaps that he was jailed and sometime after swiftly beheaded by Herod. So, who are “they”? Surely, “they” cannot be referring to just Herod and just this one incident?

Jesus was not referring to John the Baptist, He was referring to Himself as the Elijah already come, who they knew not, who they would have done unto him whatsoever they listed – so, Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them (that is, whatever that they listed or desired).”

Let examine the parallel account as recorded in Mark 9.

Mark 9:11-12 And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought. But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.

Note how Jesus first referenced Elijah, and then shift the focus to "the Son of man" - becuase they are the same person! Also note carefully the 2 sentences – “and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, .... , That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.” How plain must Jesus said to make His point? – it is written that He must suffer, and that Elijah has come and indeed also suffered”. Jesus had on many occasions told His disciples of the many sufferings that He will suffer under man as according to many prophecies (for example, in Isa 53).

Did John the Baptist “restoreth all things”? Not that I can find in my Bible. But did Jesus “restoreth all things”? Yes, according to my understanding of my Bible, He did in A.D. 70, as recorded by Luke in the Book of Acts:

Act 3:18 But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.
Act 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
Act 3:20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
Act 3:21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

Note again - He shall send Jesus Christ, … Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things…”. Jesus Christ is to return when the restitution (or restoration, or refreshing) of all things is completed. To a preterist, of which I am one, that was in A.D. 70.

His disciple, John later clarified their initial misunderstanding of John the Baptist and the Elijah-to-come (such as recorded in Matt 17:13) in the first chapter of his later gospel:

John 1:6-9 There was a man sent from God, whose name [was] John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all [men] through him might believe. He was not that Light, but [was sent] to bear witness of that Light. [That] was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
John 1:10-11 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

John 1:19-21 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

John 1:22-23 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? He said, I [am] the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.
John 1:24 And they which were sent were of the Pharisees. And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?
John 1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

It was cited so many times in the New Testament that the person “they knew not” and the “many sufferings that have done unto him” referred to Jesus, not John the Baptist.


Examining those “contradictory” verses (Luke 1:13-17)

OK, but surely the Angel Gabriel can’t be wrong when he proclaimed that John the Baptist “shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias”.

Luke 1:13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John.
Luke 1:16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.
Luke 1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

Yes, this is indeed a more difficult one to clarify. Again, I offer 2 alternative views to this “dilemma”.

1) John did conduct his ministry in the spirit and power of Elijah (but not in the person of Elijah-to-come). His ministry was a forceful and powerful one (though not in miracles) in order to command a great following, such that even factions of Pharisee and Sadducee seek his service. He did manage to have many of the children of Israel turn to their God (Luke 1:16), thus preparing the way for the appearance of Jesus. This is the more commonly accepted view.

But I will opt for the more “unorthodox” explanation of mine below. But before doing so, let compare the original prophecy of the Elijah-to-come in Malachi to that uttered by Gabriel as recorded in Luke.

Mal 4:5-6 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

Luke 1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

As far as I am concerned, this is the angelic interpretation of Mal 4:6. And especially for one who “stand in the presence of God (Luke 1:19), it should be far superior to any other interpretations proposed by any man (short of the original inspired Apostles).

Angel Gabriel gave the interpretation of “[to turn] the heart of the children to their fathers” in Mal 4:6 as meaning [to turn] the disobedient to the wisdom of the just” (Luke 1:17). So, “Disobedient is to the children as wise is to the fathers”. Make very good sense to me - disobedient children, wise fathers. But how shall we interpret “turn the heart of the fathers to the children”? Surely, it makes no sense that the Elijah-to-come will turn the wisdom of the just (father) into disobedient (children). I can accept if it is ‘the proud’, but here, it is “of the just”. So, how would one interpret “to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children”, and yet be along the line of Gabriel’s interpretation? Since we are talking about hearts and wisdom, some of Jesus’ sayings would provide the more plausible interpretation.

Luke 10:21 In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.

Matt 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Matt 19:14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

I would thus interpret that the Elijah-to-come (who is none other than Jesus Himself), will convert many “fathers” (grown, supposedly wise and prudent men) into little children (believers)! Note how Jesus addressed His disciples on the night before His crucifixion:

John 13:33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you….

Yes, eleven growth men, some perhaps might be older than Jesus Himself by a few years, were addressed as “little children”, a double emphasis with the word ‘little’ - almost like “babes”. So, paraphrasing from this interpretation, which effectively made ready a people (Chrsitians) for the Lord, before that great and dreadful day!

Luke 1:17 ... in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn grown men into believers (babes in Christ), and the disobedient (sinners) to the wisdom of the just (jusitified and filled with the Holy Spirit); to make ready a people (Christians) prepared for the Lord.

Let see what Zacharias said about the mission for his son, John the Baptist when he regain his ability to speak again under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Luke 1:67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, ….
Luke 1:76 And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways;
Luke 1:77 To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins, ….

Zacharias heard every words of the prophecy given by Gabriel. But when he regained his faculty of speech, what did he say? That’s right; John’s mission was to give knowledge of salvation unto his people (but not to give salvation itself) before the arrival of the Lord - no Elijah, no turning of hearts, and no preparing a people ready for the Lord. While John the Baptist did had many of the children of Israel turn to their God (Luke 1:16), his ministry did not convert, nor have the power to convert any one into a believer – a born-again Christian – only Jesus can!

Joh 10:41 And many resorted unto him, and said, John did no miracle: but all things that John spake of this man were true.
Joh 10:42 And many believed on him there.

That is to say, John the Baptist does not have the power to “to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just”! That being the case, perhaps Gabriel was saying something that the translation of that verse might not have conveyed clearly? I believe Gabriel linked the 2 prophecies of Malachi together to show their time sequence – that John the Messenger was to go before the Lord who is the prophesied Elijah-to-come to make ready a people prepared for the Lord before that great and dreadful day. And did Jesus proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD and the day of vengeance of God [Luke 4:19 and Isa. 61], and make ready a group of people before that great and dreadful day of the LORD in A.D. 70? He sure did. This group of people was called Christians! Thus, could Luke 1:17 be translated as below (which is consistent with the missions of John and Jesus)?

Luke 1:17 And he (John) shall go before Him [who] in the spirit and power of Elias to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

Is it possible that “The spirit and power of Elias” refers to “Him” and not “he” in the front clause of Luke 1:17? (Based on the other arguments I have put forth, this seems possible. But again, I am no Greek expert. Perhaps some one better versed in this area can comment whether such association of syntax is possible.)

Many have always believed that the ministry of John the Baptist, supposedly the Elijah-to-come, was a ministry to restore family unity, to “turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers” (as if there were great family disharmony in the first century). Let face it, if John the Baptist’s ministry was to restore family unity and harmony (which no one verse in the BIble attested to this having happened due to John's ministry), then why did Jesus in His own ministry following not long after John’s death, undo all that of John’s? It just does not sound right!

Luke 12:51-52 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
Luke 12:53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

Instead of turning the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their father, Jesus said that He is come to divide the father against the son and the son against the father, and more! Jesus’ first coming and His preaching caused family division. Yet, it is one preaching that can enable grown men to be born again as children, and turning disobedience sinners into righteous sons of God (through the forgiving of sins)!

The message of Malachi is about repentant. It is a message of “return unto Me” (Mal 3:7). It is about the wrath to come, and the Salvation that the Elijah-to-come were to offer – to be born again, to be justified, “lest I come and smite the earth with a curse”. It is definitely not about restoration of family unity.


 

Conclusion

John the Baptist was the messenger who prepared the way for the Lord. John only prepared the way, but Jesus is The Way. Just like Elijah, who ascended into the earthly heaven when his ministry on earth was done, Jesus ascended into the Heaven to the Father after His earthly ministry was faithfully accomplished. And like Elijah, whose mantle (“the spirit of Elijah” - 2Ki 2:15) fell onto his disciple Elisha, who went on to perform even greater miracles, the mantle of Jesus (the Spirit of God) fell onto His disciples during Pentecost, who also went on to perform greater works and miracles (John 14:12 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater work than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.)

Jesus was the Elijah, the Prophet, the Christ. He did come to fulfill the Laws and the Prophet, didn’t He? (Mat 5:17 - the Old Testament scriptures). He came on time as the Prophet to institute the New Covenant of Love. And as the Elijah-to-come, He arrived one generation before that dreadful day. He appeared to turn grown men into newborn babes, to desire the sincere milk of the word (1Pe 2:2), and turning disobedient sinners into justified believers, to prepare a people for the Lord. And exactly as He had said, “There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom” – which was also the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD as prophesied in Mal 4:6 – He did return in A.D. 70 in that same generation. He did suddenly came to His earthly Temple and destroyed it!

As such, if Jesus was the Elijah-to-come, and had already come, is there any further need for another Elijah-to-come in the future? Who could have a better credential then Jesus Christ?


 

 

PS: The above observations and conclusion are solely based my own personal investigation and view. I hope the above analysis will bring forth further harmony of the Bible, and (finally) identify the real prophesied Elijah-to-come. Though I am a preterist, it may not necessary reflect the view and belief of other preterists. Whatever the case, please bears with me and shares with me your thoughts, reasons and arguments if you think I am going baloney and have not consider some other critical scriptures. (MS Cheo, Singapore [mscheo@mindexsoft.com])


Background:
The alternative answer to this “no-brainer” title question comes suddenly to me (late morning of 16th Nov 2003) while I was studying a totally unrelated doctrine. It comes in a flash! Further studies and investigation, foregoing all preconceived notions, show that this “new” alternative answer is a real possibility – but not without overcoming some difficulties. I strongly doubt that I am the first or only one to arrive at this possibility – there might be others (in the last 2,000 years) who might also stumbled upon this conclusion. However, in my years of studying and readings, limited as it may be, I have not come across any reference to this same “new” conclusion I have reached (except, now, I realized it was all the while in the Bible, hence it is not really “new”!). Indeed, this biblical person fits squarely the criteria to be the prophesied Elijah-to-come before that great and dreadful day of the LORD. And Jesus Himself attested to it, if we are to believe His plain words – and it is Jesus Himself!

It is very difficult for anyone to unlearn a “truth” that have been held for many years, especially one that is commonly accepted as a ‘no-brainer’. Misunderstood doctrines or erroneous teachings taught over many centuries will take a long time to undo. Many the likes of William Tyndale had paid with their life to bring jewels of truth to the people. Perhaps many had also discovered their jewels of truth but did not share them openly or even discarded it for fear of being ostracized or branded a heretic.

I believe there are still many clouded teachings that have still yet to be made plain. And as each teaching is make clear, God willing, it further reinforces the Bible as truly inerrant and infallible Word of God. If there was a veil, it is probably put there by men willingly or unknowingly, and God permits it to be such – perhaps as a test for His children whether we live by every word of God and whether we seek to prove all things and hold fast that which is good. (1Th 5:21)

What do YOU think ?

Submit Your Comments For Posting Here
Comment Box Disabled For Security


Date:
18 Nov 2003
Time:
13:14:19

Comments

Interesting article. There are two problems, however. First, the writer holds that the disciples misunderstood when they held that he spoke of John. The problem is, as even the corroborating example shows, that the language used when the disciples' understanding was incorrect indicates explicitly that they were wrong: "These things understood not his disciples...". The logical conclusion is that their understanding was correct. Second, note that Jesus makes a distinction between Elijah and the Son of Man (Jesus); they are distinct. The simplest, most consist way of interpreting these passages is as referring to John. I see no reason why it is inconceivable for Jesus to be dividing while John was uniting while it is AOK for Jesus to be uniting and dividing Himself. KPerkins


Date:
18 Nov 2003
Time:
22:15:55

Comments

Hi Perkins, thanks for your comment. ---- I can agree with you that Matt 17:13 is referring to John. But I maintain their understanding in referring it to John was incorrect. ---- In several instances when Jesus told the disciples that He will be delivered and suffered under the hands of man, those verses are followed by "the disciples understand not". (e.g. Mar 9:30, Luke 9:44, Luke 18:32) ---- Likewise, in Matt 17:13, when Jesus prophesied that "the Son of man suffer of them", I am not surprised that the disciples did not understand it also. And only Matthew chose to record their OWN understanding then on Jesus' reply. What the disciples understood THEN need not have to be taken as gospel truth. It was their understanding, and to be fair, they might have it correct. Or they might have it wrong. After all, they were not filled with the Holy Spirit then. ---- My "argument" were taken from other gospels' passages to show that John the Baptist just did not fit the bill to be that Elijah. Did John "restoreth all things"? Jesus did. Was John severely persecuted, ridiculed, stoned? Jesus was - many times. Ask again - what things "have they done unto John whatsoever they listed" that Jesus also likewise suffered? I don't think there is any! ---- MS Cheo.


Date:
19 Nov 2003
Time:
01:34:58

Comments

To All Readers, ---- Further investigation shows me that I was wrong in my argument in explaining Matt 11:14 above. ---- I have thought that there is a good possibility that Jesus was then giving the direct affirmative answer to the question asked by John’s disciples – “Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?” by turning the focus onto Himself when He said, “this is Elias, which was for to come” (KJV translation). But the fact is that the word “this” (Strong’s #849) has been translated as “his/him” many times – a word used to associate someone previously mentioned, in this case John the Baptist! ---- In verse 10, Jesus gave a simple and direct confirmation that John is that messenger. But the way Jesus put it in verse 14 does not say explicitly that John is Elijah – but more like "if you are willing or desire to believe, then he is that Elijah to come". I am inclined to believe the reason Jesus precluded the phrase “And if ye will receive” stresses the point that it is not an factual, but nevertheless, “if you want to, go ahead and believe it”. And if they knew their scriptures, then they should know that the arrival of the Elijah would mean the soon coming of that “great and dreadful day of the Lord”. Now, it makes even more sense why Jesus added the warning – “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” I think Jesus was not that interested to identify who that Elijah was (they would not believe it anyway), but was using the opportunity to warn the people of the coming wrath! ---- MS Cheo.


Date:
19 Nov 2003
Time:
01:53:29

Comments

Oops! "this" should be Strong #846 in the above comment. ---- For those who does Hebrew/Greek word study, more info is available here ---- http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/strongs/1069230602-9662.html ---- And for the word "will" as in "If ye will receive [it]", it is Strong #2309 - having the meaning of "to will, have in mind, intend, resolved, determined, purpose, desire, wish, etc." ---- --- http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/strongs/1069231678-3302.html ---- MS Cheo.


Date:
04 Dec 2003
Time:
18:47:47

Comments

LK.1:13-17 "...and thou shalt call his name John....For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and he shall drink no wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb. And many of the children of Israel shall be turn unto the Lord their God. And he shall go before his face in the spirit and power of ELIJAH, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to walk in the wisdom of the just; to make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him." Mtt.11:12-14 "And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and men of violence take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye are willing to receive it, THIS IS ELIJAH, that is to come." Mtt.17:10-13 "And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elijah must first come? And he answered and said, Elijah indeed cometh, and shall restore all things: but I say into you, that ELIJAH IS COME ALREADY, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they would. Even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them. THEN UNDERSTOOD THE DISCIPLES THAT HE SPAKE UNTO THEM OF JOHN THE BAPTIST." Pretty straight-forward in my opinion. Upon a simple reading we are given the answer. Joseph E. Gautier Jr.


Date:
05 Dec 2003
Time:
19:47:13

Comments

Thanks, Joseph for your comments. ======== Yes, upon a simple reading, we do get the notion that that Elijah was John the Baptist, and thus missed out the main STAR of New Testament - JESUS. ======== We noted in Mal 4:5 - "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:". Both Jesus and John arrived on the same scene. As John attained his 30th 'birthday' earlier being conceived 6 months before Jesus, John probably started his ministry 6 months earlier too. Jesus certainly started later. Both began their ministry with the message, "Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." (Matt 3:2). ==== But note that Jesus began His ministry AFTER John was put into prison - Mar 1:14-15 - Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel." That basically mean John's ministry was a very short 6 months period (compared to Jesus of almost 3 years), just long enough for the Messenger to prepare the way for the Star. ======== So, was it God's intention that the people be send an Elijah and be warned for the pending disaster for only 6 months? An Elijah that performed no miracles, even though he may have exhibited the spirit and power of Elijah? But Jesus did more than just in spirit and power! Like the Elijah of old, who ended his ministry being wisped into heaven, Jesus also was likewise wisped into heaven, even the Heaven of heavens! ======== Yes, Jesus did tell His disciples, "And if ye are willing to receive it, THIS IS ELIJAH, that is to come." But John himself had also denied point blank that He was NOT! Joh 1:21 - "And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I AM NOT." Does the Bible contradict? No. Was John totally unwared of who he was, being filled with the Holy Spirit since birth, and of what mission he was to fulfilled? I believed he completed his mission accordingly as prophesied, as the MESSENGER to come, to prepare the way for the Elijah-to-come, which was fulfilled by the Man whose latchet he was not worthy to unloose. ======== As Jesus had said earlier to them, "Elijah indeed cometh, and shall restore all things: ... that Elijah is come already, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they would. Even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them". Again, ask yourself, did John 'restore all thing', or even remotely could have done that? Jesus said "SHALL" and not "hath" (remembering that John was in prison and soon to be put to death - the only known great suffering he went through). As for "they knew him not" - how can the people know that John was that Elijah if John blatantly denied it straight in their face, "I AM NOT"? Is that fair? Did they do unto John whatsoever they would? It was cited so many times in the NT that the person "they knew him not" and the "many sufferings" referred to Jesus. ======== We need to pay attention to Jesus words - "And if ye are willing to receive it". It does give a connotation of reluctance. It is like when we say, "If you want to believe such things, so be it". And so the disciples understood it to be such THEN - wrongly! Strong's #5119 for the word "then" has the meaning of "at the time", "that time" (that is according to Strong's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary, not me). Unfortunately, the force of it did not come through the way we now understand as "then". ======== MS Cheo.


Date:
09 Dec 2003
Time:
06:04:52

Comments

The way I understand Matt 17:13 and Matt 16:11, "Then the disciples understood that...", is that Matthew was just recording their understanding then, at that time - some right, some wrong and many they could not even arrive at any conclusions. ======== "Then" (Strong's #5119) according to Thayer's lexicon defines as "at the time the things under consideration were taking place". There is another word also translated as "then" (like in Matt 7:11, 12:12 - Strong's #3767, also translated as "therefore", "so", "and" ...) which Thayer states that "it is used in drawing a conclusion and in connecting sentences together logically". ======== Yes, I will certainly appreciate you sharing your study and conclusion. ==== Cheers! MS Cheo.


Date:
09 Dec 2003
Time:
21:26:44

Comments

Just realized that the links I posted on 19 Nov were pointing to temporary pages. ==== For those who are interested to pursue word study for #846, #2309, #5119 , #3767 or any words, just key in the Strong's number [without the # sign], and click the "Greek" radio button on this page : http://www.blueletterbible.org/freeoffer.html#strongs ==== MS Cheo.


Date:
24 Mar 2004
Time:
13:23:47

Comments

Thank you for your thoughts. I quote you and commend you on your wisdom... "It is very difficult for anyone to unlearn a “truth” that have been held for many years, especially one that is commonly accepted as a ‘no-brainer’. Misunderstood doctrines or erroneous teachings taught over many centuries will take a long time to undo."... "I believe there are still many clouded teachings that have still yet to be made plain." I am posting a website that will answer many, if not all of your questions and concerns concerning the "truths" we find in our Bibles. The web site (just one of many) is by Pastor Craig M. Lyons, M.Div. All of us have much to "unlearn", but I believe as long as we are breathing, it's not too late. May God be with those of you who are utterly determined to be at one with Him. http://www.paganizingfaithofyeshua.freeservers.com/


Date: 23 Oct 2005
Time: 19:36:34

Comments:

Hi...Does anyone know where I can find a Preterist church in Singapore to join? I did a search on alltheweb.com and found this website. My email address is activerelease@yahoo.com. Many thanks!!

Tze-wei Lim
Singapore


Date: 28 Feb 2007
Time: 19:20:51

Comments:

How will Elijah know that he is HE if he has been born thru tradition but have experienced miraculous events and Godly get out of occurrences only in life. and currently going thru only Christ like things to keep him from coming forward... tbloc6@yahoo.com


Date: 28 Feb 2007
Time: 19:24:15

Comments:

How can one explain healing, miracles, seeing angels, seeing doves, seeing 12 clouds in perfect alignment, speaking in God knows multiple languages, going through hell trials and tribs having 666 follow them daily and God knows every possible thing to happen all at the same time... And yet be still here????

 

Click For Index Page

Free Online Books Historical Preterism Modern Preterism Study Archive Critical Articles Dispensationalist dEmEnTiA  Main Josephus Church History Hyper Preterism Main

Email PreteristArchive.com's Sole Developer and Curator, Todd Dennis  (todd @ preteristarchive.com) Opened in 1996
http://www.preteristarchive.com