|
|
|
| ![]() Website Color Key |
Matthew 26:64 is NOT a "Preterist Time Indicator" Pointing to AD70 "In short, the usage of "Apo Arti" in Matthew 26:64 [Apo ("from" - Strongs 575) and Arti ("now on" - Strong's 737)] is highly suggestive of the themes that have been previously offered at this blog ; that is, a series of revelatory recognitions of the power and glory of Jesus Christ's dominance by friend and foe alike. Though the typically pret-friendly Weymouth translation would like to make Jesus say "later on, you will see.." this is not really honest. I would rather say that it was simply a mistake, but I find it impossible to believe that neither Richard Francis Weymouth ("If this belief ever obtains general acceptance the earlier date of the Apocalypse will also be regarded as fully established. For it will then be seen that the book describes beforehand events which took place in 70 A.D.") nor Earnest Hampden-Cook (co-editor and author of "The Christ Has Come") were aware of how important (ironically) a futurist spin on this passage is to uphold their Preterist assumptions. However, not only is there no sense of futurity in this very emphatic Greek phrase, but rather we see quite the opposite.
|
The Triumphs of Christianity over Infidelity Displayed, or the Coming of the Messiah, the True Key to the Right Understanding of the Most Difficult Passage in the New Testament; viz. of the Predictions of the Coming of Christ, of St. Paul's Man of Sin, of the Antichrist of St. John, and of the Sure Word of Prophecy of St. Peter; Being a Full Answer to the Objection of Mr. Gibbon, That our Lord and His Apostles Predicted the Near Approach of the End of the World in their own Time. The Whole being intended as an Illustration of the Necessity and Importance of Considering the Gospels as Histories, and Particularly as Histories of the great Controversy between our Lord and the Jews, Concerning the True Nature of the Messiah's Character. |
"But an impartial attention to the language of Scripture will, I am persuaded, remove all doubt upon the subject, and convince us that the Evangelists have their eye upon the destruction of Jerusalem, and upon that only." "The Author begs leave to add, that his first object having been to endeavor to understand the New Testament himself ; if he hath succeeded in obtaining a more accurate knowledge of it, than those who have gone before him ; it is not owing to superior advantages of situation ; still less, to superior learning and abilities. Indeed he cannot help considering it as one considerable argument in favor of Christianity, that it requires, not so much, a superior depth of learning, as an attentive perusal of it as an History, and particularly, as an History of the great Controversy between Jesus and the Jews, concerning the true nature of the Messiah's Character. Viewing it in this light, discoveries have gradually been made by him, of which he had no conception, particularly with respect to St. Paul's Man of Sin, and the Antichrist of St. John. And he is firmly persuaded, that if the same plan is faithfully pursued ; it will be followed by discoveries, still more important and satisfactory! ASH, 7th August, 1802." ("The Triumph of Christianity over Infidelity, iv,v) (On
The Significance of A.D. 70) "Nor can I agree with him when he says, that our blessed Lord knew very well that he should not come, while that generation, to whom he preached, was alive, and that all his Apostles knew this, as well as he; for this is expressly contrary to our Lord's own assertion, in many parts of the gospels, that the Son of Man would come before that generation was wholly passed away." (An Attempt to Illustrate..) (On
The "Transfiguration Theory" of
Matthew 16:27-28) "His argument, that the ancients are unanimously on his side, has as little weight with me, as with the best commentators in modern times; for as Mr. Dodwell long ago observed; they fell far short of the solidity of the moderns, who excel them, not only in philosophy and learning, but in the knowledge of antiquity, and even of their own languages. The principal argument used by Mr. Churton, is the close connection of Matthew xvi, 28, and the parallel chapters of Mark and Luke, with the account of the transfiguration. But, with due submission, I think the connection is evidently, not with the transfiguration, but with the preceding context. We need only go back to the 27th verse, to perceive this, "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father, with his angels, and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, there will be some standing here, who shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." -The coming of the Son of Man in the former, and his coming in his kingdom, in the latter of these verses, clearly determines the connection between the two; for in the account of the transfiguration, which immediately follows, there is not a word said of his coming. Besides, to foretel that the disciples would not die till an event took place which was to happen but six days after, this, as Bishop Newcome observes, would be a prophecy unworthy of Christ. I have only to add, that the same connection is observable in mark ix, 2, and in Luke ix, 28." (An Attempt to Illustrate..) "But though I cannot, upon a careful perusal of this part of his work, agree with him in every thing he says, concerning the different comings of Christ mentioned in the New Testament; yet it has given me great satisfaction to find him saying, "that the Apostles, by the coming of Christ, which they represented as at hand, when they wrote their epistles, meant his coming to establish his spiritual kingdom over all people, nations, and languages, and not his coming to put an end to the world; it is evident from what Christ himself told them, Matt. xvi, 28; There be some standing here, who shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." And agreeably to this account of the coming of Christ, and the end of all things, he observes, that every passage of their epistles, in which the Apostles have spoken of these things as at hand, may, with the greatest propriety, be interested of Christ's coming to establish his own everlasting kingdom over all people, nations, and languages, by destroying Jerusalem, putting an end to he law of Moses, and spreading the Gospel through the world." (APPENDIX) (On
Matthew 24:4-5) (On
Matthew 24:30a) (On
Matthew 24:36/Mark 13:32) "Bishop Peace questions the authenticity of the last clause of this and the parallel verse in St. Mark, and quotes Ambrose, as saying they were not found in ancient Greek manuscripts of his day; and it is remarkable that St. Luke omits the whole of this verse; I but I do not know that any thing can be gathered from that, as each of the Evangelists have taken notice of some particular which has not been recorded by others. It may however be questioned, whether the sense of this passage is not to be found elsewhere? Acts 1, 7. "It is not for you to know the times and the seasons which the Father hath put in his own power." (An Attempt to Illustrate..) (On Matthew 24:37) "The providence of God over my disciples, and the effect of their attention to my forewarnings, will then be remarkable: a distinction will take place between those whose external circumstances are alike. My disciples will be preserved, and others will perish. See Bishop Newcome's Observations on our Lord's conduct as a Divine Instructor." (ibid.) (On II Thessalonians 1:7 ;
Nature of Christ's Return) "But notwithstanding we agree upon this part of the subject, yet we differ widely in our ideas of some passages in the two epistles, which he has applied to the day of final judgment, but which, I think, relate to the approaching destruction of Jerusalem; particularly upon I Thess. v, and 2 Thess. 2." (APPENDIX) (On Hebrews 10:37 ;
Nature of Christ's Return) (On
The "Transition Text Theory") "...the whole of the xxivth of Matthew, and particularly the 36th and following verses, relate solely to the destruction of Jerusalem, exclusively of a second coming, and of the end of the world." (ibid., p.131) (On
the
"Double Fulfillment Theory") (On
'The Man of Sin') (On Taylor's 'Day of the Lord at Death" Hypothesis)
"Of Glasgow College. He received priest's orders 21 December 1777, at the hands of the Bishop of London, by letters dimissory from the Archbishop, and on the follow day was licensed to the curacy of Eastry with Worth. On resigning Tilmanstone he was collated to the rectory of Tunstall, 21 December 1902. On the same day he resigned the perpetual curacy of Ash. With the rectory of Tunstall he also held the curacy of Newington next Sittingbourne. The following entry in the Tilmanstone Register, made during Mr. Nisbett's incumbency, bears testimony to the loyalty of the parishoners : "Memorandum. That the parish of Tilmanstone was illuminated on the 18th day of March 1789, in honour of His Majesty King Geroge the 3rd's recovery of his health." (Archaeologia Cantiana, Kent Archeological Society, 1893, p. 116) Send an email with your comments to todd @ preteristarchive.com Be sure to include the article name. They will be posted shortly upon receipt |
Email PreteristArchive.com's Sole Developer and Curator, Todd Dennis
(todd @ preteristarchive.com)
Opened in 1996 |