ARCHIVE: The "Great tribulation" and the Testimony of the Early Church Fathers

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren


Well as you should know, holding to a very minority position yourself, that head counts do not decide who's theology is right. So no, I would never try the vain exercise of trying to prove my point by a majority vote. But I can prove that there have been notable and significant adherants to the view that the Great Tribulation is past from the dawn of Christian history through the present. In fact, the commentaries of prominent scholars in the centuries preceeding the rise to popularity of dispensationalism held this view in the majority (by the way). This is not something that is generally disputed in the scholarly community.

Dee Dee, with all due respect I think you are grossly missing the point.

Holding a minority position regarding theology is one thing. Indeed a minority position could be just as "right" or just as "wrong" as a majority position.

But that really isn't what is up for debate here.

We are talking about an event that is not solely theological in nature.

Had the Great Tribulation happened it wouldn't be only noticed by theologians. All of the world would had been forever changed from that point on.

For instance.... It would be very difficult for any person to make a compelling argument that WWII DIDN'T happen. Mainly because WWII effected almost every major nation and society on earth. The evidence for WWII is overwhelming in a multitude of forms (physical evidence, historical, traditional, lore etc.)

How Much more would have the Great Tribulation effected the world?

Just imagine.... had the Great Tribulation ACTUALLY HAPPENED in 70AD the events that would have transpired would have been recorded in a variety of ways by every culture and society on the planet! Just as the events and evidence from the great flood are available to this very day in a variety of forms from almost EVERY SINGLE society on the face of this planet! (not just the Jewish and Christian societies - as you well know).

Clearly an event such as the Great Tribulation transpiring would get noticed by more than a handful of Preterists.

This is not JUST a theological debate. The Great Tribulation didn't happen. It didn't! And it is silly and embarrassing to think otherwise.

P.S. Some of those arguments about us not landing on the moon are pretty clever when you don't step back and look at the "Big Picture".

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

Hey Knight!! I hope you had a fantastic trip... and if you really took all of TOL with you, why don't I feel like I got away for the weekend :noid: I will get back with you as soon as I can on your points.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
why don't I feel like I got away for the weekend

You were still working hard deep within my laptop.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
Why do the preterists refuse to tell us when the following events came to pass?:

"And he (the beast) exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him,and caused the earth and them who dwelleth on it to worship the first beast,whose deadly wound was healed.And he doeth great wonders,so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men.And deceiveth them that dwell on earth by the means of those miracles...and he causeth all,both small and great,rich and poor,free and enslaved,to receive a mark on their right hand,or in their foreheads,and that no man might buy or sell,except he that had the mark,or the name of the beast,or the number of his name"(Rev.12-17).

It is obvious to anyone with the slightest bit of spiritual understanding that these things have NOT yet happened.However,those who say that they have already occured will not tell us when they did occur.They say that their ideas are based on the Holy Scriptures,but when given a chance to prove what they say,they refuse!

In His grace,--Jerry

Great point and excellent question.

 

[Solly]

This is the problem I have here.

Firstly I should say I am not praeterist as DD is; while I believe that most of Matt 24 was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem, I am not conviced that Rev refers primarily to 1st cent issues.

So, Matt 24.
14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

The end of the world was Rome. The Gospel was preached there. Ever read Asimov's Foundation trilogy, where they are looking for the Second Foundation at Star's End? Stars End turned out to be Trantor, the Capital Planet of the Empire. All roads lead to Rome, and all roads have two ends.

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand

A case has been made for this being the Roman assualt on Jerusalem, and the events in the temple re the insurgent factions.

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

Now DD makes a great deal about time delimiters. Well here we have a space delimiter: Judea. And local conditions relevant to an escape from Jerusalem.

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.

And so we have our phrase. Which obviously, in the context of the passage refers to events in Judea; before you go on to any other matter, be it the events themselves, or cross references to Revelation, this fact has to be recognised. The reference is to events in Judea. Therefore the term Great is relative; there is no definite article in the greek, it reads: "tribulation great".
And of course nothing had been seen like it: the Jewish administration brought to a resounding end, in bloodshed and wrath, greater even than when Israel was taken into exile, for at least a people were left in the land, and administered from Babylon. This is final: computer, end programme.

23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. 24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. 25 Behold, I have told you before. 26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. 27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

DD has dealt elsewhere with the fact of where Jesus is coming to.

28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.

Eagles? Just coincidence that the Roman legions used Eagles as mascots I suppose.

29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Again, any reading of OT texts will show that this is justified hyperbole, along the lines of mountains melting, trees clapping, and hills skipping. Also justified imagery, in referring to powers and authorities among men as hills and mountain, and trees of lebanon, etc.

From this point, I am of the opinion that the text moves into teaching relevant to the end of the age before Christ's return, but I can follow the argument that even this is for 70ad.

In conclusion, the Disp system has taken the phrase "Great Tribulation" and filled it with a lot a theological content re the End of the World. Having done so, it tries to place this now bloated phrase back into its position, but finds that it is like trying to get a quart into a pint pot as afar as 70ad is concerned, so - ah ha! -it must fit elsewhere, and does so dragging Matt 24 with it.
This is wrongly dividing scriputure.

I am led to the conclusion that the DispFut system leaves you so left behind, that you cannot see right ahead.

peace in Him

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

Hey Solly... would you be interest in quick little rap with me about the "end of the age"? We started this once but never really followed through. Can you go over to the "Dee Dee convert me to preterism" thread and read (I think it is my last post) on the chronology of the ages and tell me where you would shoot my chronology down? No one has yet to mount a coherent argument against it, but rather just brings in "yeah but" verses that never interact with mine. That is quite frustrating.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

All I hear are the crickets...

All I hear are the crickets...

All I hear are the crickets and the footsteps of those running away as fast as they can so that they will not have to address the following SCripture passages.

Why do the preterists refuse to tell us when the following events came to pass?:

"And he (the beast) exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him,and caused the earth and them who dwelleth on it to worship the first beast,whose deadly wound was healed.And he doeth great wonders,so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men.And deceiveth them that dwell on earth by the means of those miracles...and he causeth all,both small and great,rich and poor,free and enslaved,to receive a mark on their right hand,or in their foreheads,and that no man might buy or sell,except he that had the mark,or the name of the beast,or the number of his name"(Rev.12-17).

It is obvious to anyone with the slightest bit of spiritual understanding that these things have NOT yet happened.However,those who say that they have already occured will not tell us when they did occur.They say that their ideas are based on the Holy Scriptures,but when given a chance to prove what they say,they refuse!

They woulod rather remain confused and lead others to their same confusion state than to face the verses which prove that their teaching is in error.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Re: All I hear are the crickets...

Re: All I hear are the crickets...

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart

It is obvious to anyone with the slightest bit of spiritual understanding that these things have NOT yet happened.

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry I would like to correct you if I may.

One wouldn't need "spiritual understanding" to determine these things have NOT happened. As I have stated before.... had the Great Tribulation happened its events would have been woven into world history in a dramatic way regardless of a societies religious beliefs or lack thereof.

Preterism painfully fails biblically but far more damaging to preterism is its complete absence in world history.

The Great Tribulation didn't happen. It didn't!

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

Dear Knight:

Dee Dee, with all due respect I think you are grossly missing the point.

And I am glad for you starting in that manner for I hope that my response is also filled with the same mutual respect that we share.

We are talking about an event that is not solely theological in nature.

Agreed.

Had the Great Tribulation happened it wouldn't be only noticed by theologians. All of the world would had been forever changed from that point on.

Ah but here is where I believe that you are grossly missing the point. You obviously believe that the Great Tribulation is planet-wide in scope, and then have taken your presuppositions to judge the alleged incredulity of my position that the Great Tribulation has already happened as being equivalent to someone who holds that that Holocaust did not happen. This is completely illegitimate, and is very similar in principle to the misconceptions that some perpetrate about the OV. Let me explain. I often hear the uninformed say that OV limits the power of God from knowing the future, and turn the argument into one soley based on whether or not God is omnipotent. But you and I both know that is a complete straw man. The argument is not soley over whether or not God could know a knowable future, but whether the future exists to be known in any meaningful way. Thus the argument is not about the nature of God per se, but about the nature of the future. Thus the nonOV attempts to make the OV look silly and ridiculous soley on those grounds are founded on complete beds of straw.

By analogy that is what you are doing to me, though I believe it is inadvertent due to misunderstanding. I do not believe that the Great Tribulation was planet-wide in scope for the very reasons that Solly has articulated and I will articulate again. Thus, you cannot right judge me as an ignoramus of the sort that would deny that the Holocaust happened because I allegedly can accept the absence of worldwide testimony to this catastrophe, when I don’t believe it was worldwide to begin with!! You need to start from my presuppositions to judge whether or not I am being realistic about the amount of evidence required. Since I believe it is a catastrophic judgment limited to Judea…. I do have ample historical evidence contained within the writings of the ECF and more particularly Josephus’ Jewish Wars which reads in many place like it was written straight out of Matthew 24. Thus the issue is not over the lack of worldwide evidence, the issue is over the nature and scope of the Great Tribulation which is a Scriptural issue, and not one of how historically gullible that I allegedly am.

Now briefly to recap why I do not believe it is a planetwide catastrophe…..

I am not going to give all of the reasons, just some of the major ones. First of all, the disciples do not ask Jesus when is the end of the world. They asked him “when is the end of the age?” That is very important. And the context of their question must be taken into consideration. In other words, what prompted that question from them in the first place?

It was Jesus’ startling predictions about the destruction of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple. Nothing at all in the context gives any whiff of a hint that the end of the whole world, as we understand it, to be in view. The entire context of the passage is limited to Jerusalem. Here are some examples:

Matthew 24:15 – Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

If this was worldwide destruction, fleeing to the mountains would not do anyone any good. It is obviously a destruction limited to Judea from which the elect must flee.

Luke 21:23 – But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people.

This wrath is limited to the “land,” and idiomatically Jewish way of saying “Israel” and “this people,” i.e. the Jewish apostates. It is not a wrath upon the whole planet or upon all the unsaved peoples of the planet. The whole context leading up to the Discourse is the pronouncement of doom upon the Jewish apostates (see Matthew 23). There is nothing at all in the context speaking of the end of the whole world.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
Dear Knight:
Now briefly to recap why I do not believe it is a planetwide catastrophe?..

LOL! Of course you have to minimize the Great Tribulation!

Your entire theology relies on such minimization!

- We DID land on the moon.
- The Holocaust DID happen.
- The earth isn't flat.
- Crop circles are an admitted hoax.
- The Great Tribulation DIDN'T happen (yet).

Mat 24:21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.

One would think an event such as described above might get more than a one sentence description in a common encyclopedia.

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

Dear Knight -

Hey I am running out the door...... But I think you now see my point that the comparision is unjust. The issue is not over the scope and nature of my allegedly historical gullibility but over the scope and nature of the Great Tribulation. The precise defining of issues in dispute is critical to fair exchange and debating. But on the verse you posited....

Okay, you had objected that Jesus said that the Tribulation of those days was to be the worst of what had already happened and what would happen in the future. Notice, that this very statement makes it impossible to be an event that happens at the end of history for there would have been no reason for Jesus to say “nor shall ever be.” This is obviously an event in the stream of normal history.
Jesus was speaking in the prophetic “language” of the OT prophet. Hyperbole and dramatic emphasis were stock and trade of that “language.” Jesus’ language is nearly identical to Ezekiel 5:9-

Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: ‘Indeed I, even I, am against you and will execute judgments in your midst in the sight of the nations. 9 And I will do among you what I have never done, and the like of which I will never do again, because of all your abominations.

That is describing a PAST event. If we are going to be woodenly literal here a large contradiction has just been unearthed in Scripture. Now the context of this passage is the Jews and Jerusalem. But even the futurists believe that the future Great Tribulation will be worse than that. This is explained through prophetic hyperbole and proverbial. This same language is used in Exodus 11:6 - even the futurists believe that there will be a greater anguish and cry in Egypt in the Great Tribulation.

Josephus also describes the loss of Jerusalem in similar language (proving it is common first century idiom) – “The war which the Jews made with the Romans hath been he greatest of all those, not only that have been in our times, but, in a manner, of those that ever were heard of.”

Additionally, it is the reason and repercussions of this judgment that make it the greatest ever. “Greatest” is not measured solely in terms of lives lost, but in terms of eternal significance. This was the greatest loss that could ever happen to the Jewish people. They recognized that the removal of the Temple was the ultimate sign of God’s judgment and the worst possible calamity that could ever happen to them. This was the ultimate judgment upon ethnic Israel, it has never been worse, and it will not never be worse. It was God’s covenant lawsuit against them. The culmination of the curses of Deut. 28.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

P.S. Dee Dee if you would like to debate God's foreknowledge with me just say so!

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

LOLOL!!! Maybe some day Sir Knight, maybe some day.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
Dear Knight -

Hey I am running out the door...... But I think you now see my point that the comparision is unjust. The issue is not over the scope and nature of my allegedly historical gullibility but over the scope and nature of the Great Tribulation. The precise defining of issues in dispute is critical to fair exchange and debating. But on the verse you posited....

OK if that paragraph made sense to anyone please send me a translation.

You continue....

Okay, you had objected that Jesus said that the Tribulation of those days was to be the worst of what had already happened and what would happen in the future. Notice, that this very statement makes it impossible to be an event that happens at the end of history for there would have been no reason for Jesus to say ?nor shall ever be.? This is obviously an event in the stream of normal history.
Jesus was speaking in the prophetic ?language? of the OT prophet. Hyperbole and dramatic emphasis were stock and trade of that ?language.? Jesus? language is nearly identical to Ezekiel 5:9-

That is a completely flawed line of thinking! I am shocked I even read it! Totally illogical! The Great Tribulation was described as an event without equal.... there is no reason to think otherwise. There is no logical reason that after the event was over another event like it would never happen again for an eternity.

In fact... for this very reason... preterism fails miserably! Since we know for a fact that many events have happened since the the destruction of Jerusalem that have been FAAARRRRRR worse in every respect.

Furthermore....
Even if "such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be." were a figure of speech (as you assert) the figure of speech would have meaning. That meaning would be that the Great Tribulation would be a INCREDIBLE event! Huge, massive and certainly close to one of the worst events on the face of the planet!

The figure of speech wouldn't mean the event was a minor blip in the radar of world history.

Clearly an event such as....

Revelation 9:18 By these three plagues a third of mankind was killed' by the fire and the smoke and the brimstone which came out of their mouths.

Would be noticed by more than a handful of preterists.

Oh... maybe "a third of mankind was killed" is another figure of speech?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
LOLOL!!! Maybe some day Sir Knight, maybe some day.

Oh please.... bring it on.. bring it on!

In the meantime answer Jerry's question.

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

Dear Knight:

I am at work but I will further get to your response to my last post soon. On the one passage brought up by Jerry that you referenced, I have answered that one in the past... and I am not going to go round and round with Jerry at this point. Perhaps when I have more time not dedicated to other issues (and life in general), but I do have to make choices in some places. This one discussion with you however, I am finding very interesting.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Actually,the early church did not think that the descruction of Jerusalem in 70AD was the "great tribulation".It was not until "the crushing defeat in the later Bar Kokhba war...the early church began to speak of the hand of God´s judgment on Judaism.Little reference to this idea is found in Christian writings following the first revolt in A.D. 66-70"(Richardson,"Israel in the Apolostic Church",p.36).

The following is a description of the events concerning the Bar Kokhba War:

"The Bar Kokhba revolt marked a time of high hopes followed by violent despair. The Jews were handed expectations of a homeland and a Holy Temple, but in the end were persecuted and sold into slavery. During the revolt itself, the Jews gained enormous amounts of land, only to be pushed back and crushed in the final battle of Bethar.
When Hadrian first became the Roman emperor in 118 C.E., he was sympathetic to the Jews. He allowed them to return to Jerusalem and granted permission for the rebuilding of their Holy Temple. The Jews’ expectations rose as they made organizational and financial preparations to rebuild the temple. Hadrian quickly went back on his word, however, and requested that the site of the Temple be moved from its original location. He also began deporting Jews to North Africa.
The Jews prepared to rebel until Rabbi Joshua ben Hananiah calmed them. The Jews then satisfied themselves with preparing secretly in case a rebellion would later become necessary. They built hideouts in caves and did shoddy work building weapons so that the Romans would reject the weapons and return them to the Jews.
The Jews organized guerilla forces and, in 123 C.E., began launching surprise attacks against the Romans. From that point on, life only got worse for the Jews. Hadrian brought an extra army legion, the "Sixth Ferrata," into Judea to deal with the terrorism. Hadrian hated "foreign" religions and forbade the Jews to perform circumcisions. He appointed Tinneius Rufus governor of Judea. Rufus was a harsh ruler who took advantage of Jewish women. In approximately 132 C.E., Hadrian began to establish a city in Jerusalem called Aelia Capitolina, the name being a combination of his own name and that of the Roman god Jupiter Capitolinus. He started to build a temple to Jupiter in place of the Jewish Holy Temple.
As long as Hadrian remained near Judea, the Jews stayed relatively quiet. When he left in 132, the Jews began their rebellion on a large scale. They seized towns and fortified them with walls and subterranean passages. Under the strong leadership of Shimon Bar-Kokhba, the Jews captured approximately 50 strongholds in Palestine and 985 undefended towns and villages, including Jerusalem. Jews from other countries, and even some gentiles, volunteered to join their crusade. The Jews minted coins with slogans such as "The freedom of Israel" written in Hebrew. Hadrian dispatched General Publus Marcellus, governor of Syria, to help Rufus, but the Jews defeated both Roman leaders. The Jews then invaded the coastal region and the Romans began sea battles against them.
The turning point of the war came when Hadrian sent into Judea one of his best generals from Britain, Julius Severus, along with former governor of Germania, Hadrianus Quintus Lollius Urbicus. By that time, there were 12 army legions from Egypt, Britain, Syria and other areas in Palestine. Due to the large number of Jewish rebels, instead of waging open war, Severus besieged Jewish fortresses and held back food until the Jews grew weak. Only then did his attack escalate into outright war. The Romans demolished all 50 Jewish fortresses and 985 villages. The main conflicts took place in Judea, the Shephela, the mountains and the Judean desert, though fighting also spread to Northern Israel. The Romans suffered heavy casualties as well and Hadrian did not send his usual message to the Senate that "I and my army are well."
The final battle of the war took place in Bethar, Bar-Kokhba's headquarters, which housed both the Sanhedrin (Jewish High Court) and the home of the Nasi (leader). Bethar was a vital military stronghold because of its strategic location on a mountain ridge overlooking both the Valley of Sorek and the important Jerusalem-Bet Guvrin Road. Thousands of Jewish refugees fled to Bethar during the war. In 135 C.E., Hadrian's army besieged Bethar and on the 9th of Av, the Jewish fast day commemorating the destruction of the first and second Holy Temples, the walls of Bethar fell. After a fierce battle, every Jew in Bethar was killed. Six days passed before the Romans allowed the Jews to bury their dead.
Following the battle of Bethar, there were a few small skirmishes in the Judean Desert Caves, but the war was essentially over and Judean independence was lost. The Romans plowed Jerusalem with a yoke of oxen. Jews were sold into slavery and many were transported to Egypt. Judean settlements were not rebuilt. Jerusalem was turned into a pagan city called Aelia Capitolina and the Jews were forbidden to live there. They were permitted to enter only on the 9th of Av to mourn their losses in the revolt. Hadrian changed the country's name from Judea to Syria Palestina.
In the years following the revolt, Hadrian discriminated against all Judeo-Christian sects, but the worst persecution was directed against religious Jews. He made anti-religious decrees forbidding Torah study, Sabbath observance, circumcision, Jewish courts, meeting in synagogues and other ritual practices. Many Jews assimilated and many sages and prominent men were martyred including Rabbi Akiva and the rest of the Asara Harugei Malchut (ten martyrs). This age of persecution lasted throughout the remainder of Hadrian's reign, until 138 C.E.

Sources: Encyclopedia Judaica. "Bar Kokhba". Keter Publishing House, Jerusalem."

So we can see that the early church did not even consider the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD as God´s final judgment on Jerusalem.Therefoe,it is obvious that the early church did not believe that the destruction of Jerusalem was the "great tribulation".

But perhaps they were all wrong,and Dee Dee is right.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
Dear Knight:

I am at work but I will further get to your response to my last post soon. On the one passage brought up by Jerry that you referenced, I have answered that one in the past... and I am not going to go round and round with Jerry at this point. Perhaps when I have more time not dedicated to other issues (and life in general), but I do have to make choices in some places. This one discussion with you however, I am finding very interesting.

OK... since you claim you have already answered Jerry's question.... how about you copy and paste your previously written answer here.

Or you could point me DIRECTLY to the previous answer so I can review it.

Or... maybe another preterist would like to answer it.

I think at this point simply saying "it has already been answered" is about as close as one can get to throwing the towel as I have ever seen.

 

[Dee Dee Warren]

Dear Knight:

I will try and find where it is posted at.. I suspect it is somewhere in the tortuously long "Greetings" thread, and unfortunately I did not save it as a text file. But, if I cannot find it, when I catch up with other obligations I will provide that answer to you.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Dee Dee Warren
Dear Knight:

I will try and find where it is posted at.. I suspect it is somewhere in the tortuously long "Greetings" thread, and unfortunately I did not save it as a text file. But, if I cannot find it, when I catch up with other obligations I will provide that answer to you.

Very nice.