Quote
Robin said:
Quote
john said:

I was always under the impression that, for the most part, the last days were from the time of Christ until His second coming. So, we are still in the last days even now. I realize you alluded to the fact also. I do agree that the last days may have different meanings or more than one meaning (for example, a current and future one) depending on the passage. I guess what I'm saying is that I think we are living in the last days now and have been for the past 2000-odd years.

Yes in an important sense we are still in the last days. But this present time is better described, I believe, as "the millennium" (not a literal period 365,000 24-hour days give or take for leap years) than "the last days."

I'm not so sure I agree that the present time is better desribed as "the millennium" than the last days. I do agree that we are living in "the millennium" from the amillenial point of view (being that time between Christ's first and second coming). I also think that time is the last days. I'm not sure I would use one to the exclusion of the other.

Quote
Quote
I really have a hard time believing that blood ran up to a horse's bridle. There may have been enough splattering around that a horse's bridle was soaked with blood, but "ran" signifies a river which is quite a different story. Do you have references for that?

To be fair, a Roman bridle wasn't the thing that went in the horse's mouth, but something that ran around the horse's belly. And also to be fair, the reference in Revelation 14 could certainly refer to the Second Coming rather than to the events of 70 A.D. in Jerusalem. The Jewish historian Josephus described a massive slaughter there in which blood gathered in places to that depth.

I am not saying that the Second Coming took place in 70 A.D.!! That would be heresy! But obviously whatever terrible judgement-coming of Christ was to come in "this generation" (Matthew 23:36 and 24:34 - see also 16:28) happened just as Jesus said it would.

Don't worry, I never entertained the thought that you were implying the Second Coming took place in 70 A.D. Thanks for clarification about the Roman bridle and locations of the blood. If that is the case, then I think it's very possible.

Quote
I believe we should count the "last days" in such passages as Joel 2 and Acts 2 and Hebrews 1 etc as the period between the Lord's ascension and the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, and "the last Day" as the time yet future when the Lord returns to catch away His bride and judge the earth. This is orthodox preterism. It has been the doctrine of the historic Christian religion for most of it's nearly 2,000 year history. Most Charismatics have never heard of it.

I think it may be a case of the passage having a present meaning (at the time) and a future meaning. I do think the last days in Acts 2 and Joel 2 may have been looking at the period from Christ until A.D. 70, but it also has relevance to the present last days. You may be interested in Calvin's take on Acts 2:14-21 (and Joel)
http://www.biblestudyguide.org/comment/calvin/comm_vol36/htm/ix.iii.htm

For example,
Quote
Therefore, this word prophesy doth signify nothing else save only the rare and excellent gift of understanding, as if Joel should say, Under the kingdom of Christ there shall not be a few prophets only, unto whom God may reveal his secrets; but all men shall be endued with spiritual wisdom, even to the prophetical excellency. As it is also in Jeremiah,

"Every man shall no longer teach his neighbor; because they shall all know me, from the least unto the greatest,"

In Calvin's opinion, the "prophecy" isn't even prophecy as we consider Bible prophecy, but just understanding of the Scriptures and spiritual wisdom. If you take this point of view, then the desire to confine the meaning of the passage to only period of years from Christ until A.D. 70 disappears. I think for people coming from a charismatic background where this passage is so often applied to actual prophecy produces a reaction in which one wants to confine the verse only until 70 A.D. to combat the misapplication of it by the charismatics. But, in doing so, you miss out on the larger meaning of the verse. Of course, we can debate what kind of prophecy is actually meant in the verse. Calvin isn't always right.

As for the "Last Day" and the "last days", I wasn't at all trying to imply that the Last Day was the last days or that the last days were the Last Day. I think the difference in the two is pretty clear (or at least that they aren't the same thing).

John