Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Full Preterism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Full Preterism

    Originally posted by Bing
    I might be branching into an area not allowed here (in which case, Rommie, you probably know to truncate this discussion more than I do) but would a Full Preterist such as yourself believe that the bodily resurrection and the actual future physical return of Jesus and the final and eternal judgement of mankind will actually happen at some stage? I am uncertain as to whether you believe they are not Biblically prophesied, or whether they will not happen at all.
    Hi Bing,

    Sorry I couldn't answer your question in End Times Chat but I wanted to abide with forum rules.

    No I don't believe they will happen in the future because I believe they already happened in 70 A.D. The scriptures that speak of a second appearing and the resurrection of the dead I believe(full preterism) to be of a spiritual nature and not a physical one. I know you are aware of the partial-preterist point of view but that view leaves 1 Thessalonians 4:13 (rapture) as future and the Hebrews "second appearing(coming)" as future where I believe they were fulfilled. Heresy gets thrown around alot because the physical aspect of these events has been so drilled into Churches that believing in the unseen aspect of it is inconceivable. I do believe there is scripture proving these points but that I can explain only if you wish to further this thread.

    Also, the Judgement scene in Revelation I don't believe to be a final judgment but a judgement that began in 70 A.D. with the "dead in Christ" and the unfaithful dead and is now ongoing on through history as each person dies and is immediately judged and then enters paradise or the second death(lake of fire). Notice how Revelation 20 never says "final judgment" or that it occurs once. John is only shown a picture of the judgement at that time. The events shown after such as the New Jerusalem and access to the tree of life happened in 70 A.D. as well(IMO). There is scriptural details that support this that I can share but again only if you or someone else wishes.

    In answer I do believe in the 2nd appearing(coming), resurrection of the dead, judgement, New Jerusalem, and access to the tree of life, but that they occurred in the 1st century. The nature of them is also a spiritual event rather then a physical event.

    Blessings Bing!

  • #2
    Romulus,
    Thank you so much for taking the time to answer this question.

    Is this orthodox full preterism, or is it your own personal belief? To your knowledge, is this the typical treatment of scripture that full preterism ascribes to?

    Will the earth in its present state go on forever, then? If there is no end of the age, if there is no second coming, but that each believer enters judgement only upon death, when comes the final bookend of this experience we call life on earth?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Bing View Post
      Romulus,
      Thank you so much for taking the time to answer this question.

      Is this orthodox full preterism, or is it your own personal belief? To your knowledge, is this the typical treatment of scripture that full preterism ascribes to?

      Will the earth in its present state go on forever, then? If there is no end of the age, if there is no second coming, but that each believer enters judgement only upon death, when comes the final bookend of this experience we call life on earth?
      Hi Bing,

      This is not orthodox unfortunately since it is outside of historical orthodox teachings which is why "heresy" gets thrown around alot. There is no such thing as "orthodox full preterism". This is actually known as Consistant Preterism. The difference is I have not made up my mind on the thousand year issue in regards to Satan's final uprising. Full preterism believes this to be in 70 A.D. but I have difficulties with that since it then throws the thousand years prior to 70 A.D. right after Christ's crucifixion in 30 A.D. and that forces the martyrdom of the saints under the beast at that time which I don't believe happened then but in 70 A.D.

      My views are still considered Full-Preterist since I believe(contrary to partial-preterism) that the second appearing(coming), resurrection of the dead (1st resurrection), and the Judgment(ongoing in history) to be past events. This goes hand in hand with a teaching of the atonement in the Old Covenant and the stipulations that Jesus was fulfilling in His work on Calvary. It is a wonderful plan of redemption that I believe culimnated in His second appearing "unto salvation" for all humanity. It was not a physical coming since the Old Testament "comings" in judgement were also never literal as prophecied in Isaiah and Psalms. I can expand on this if you wish but otherwise this is what I believe but do not comment on as per ETC board rules.

      God Bless Bing and have a wonderful weekend Brother!

      Comment


      • #4
        Dear Romulus:

        Just a quick question. I was reading your postings to Bing and appreciated your succinct comments as they clear up much of what I had been reading by various preterist posters. Because of board rules I understand why some of the preterist postings seem strange as they are necessarily incomplete. Thanks for clarifying. It helps.

        I was reading II Tim 2:18 and wondering how you see it in light of your general view that most of prophecy was fulfilled in 70 A.D. Paul says,

        "...who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some."

        Thanks for your time to post the above summary.
        Blessings,
        Gary

        Comment


        • #5
          Romulus,

          Thanks again for your replies. I've checked with the powers that be, and we are allowed to play here in controversial issues. Let's play nice, and make sure that nobody goes near the heresy card.

          I was wondering if I could get a little more clarification on some of my questions above:

          First, by "Orthodox Preterism" (which I realise is a hilariously ironic term) I meant the standard preterism spin. Basically, if I run into a full preterist, would he or she be likely to agree with you on most of the key issues?

          Second, I think I understand your take on the second coming of Christ, the resurrection and the judgement. Which of these following scenarios best describes your belief:

          - Jesus is still coming, we will be resurrected and judged, but these events are not described in the Bible; the Bible only describes past comings and the first resurrection and the ongoing historical judgement.

          - Jesus is not coming back. He came spiritually, and we'll keep going until we die and go to heaven.


          Third, what is your interpretation of Revelation 21-22? Are they future or past? It would seem that these passages (and others like them, describing eternity) cannot have been fulfilled, even by the most symbolic interpretation.

          Comment


          • #6
            Dear Romulus:

            Just a quick question. I was reading your postings to Bing and appreciated your succinct comments as they clear up much of what I had been reading by various preterist posters. Because of board rules I understand why some of the preterist postings seem strange as they are necessarily incomplete. Thanks for clarifying. It helps.
            Hi Gary,

            I am more then happy to answer your questions. Just a note of clarification that preterism usually falls under two views and only Full-Preterism is outside board rules. Partial-Preterism confirms to orthodox teachings and the historic Church and does not conflict with those views as presented in the creeds. Partial-Preterism is allowed to be expressed in all open forums while Full-Preterism is only allowed here in controversial issues and world religions.

            I was reading II Tim 2:18 and wondering how you see it in light of your general view that most of prophecy was fulfilled in 70 A.D. Paul says,

            "...who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some."
            Here is the full scripture:

            II Timothy 2

            16Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly. 17Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, 18who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some. 19Nevertheless, God's solid foundation stands firm, sealed with this inscription: "The Lord knows those who are his,"[a] and, "Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness."

            This is usually where many will assume Full-Preterism falls under and then label it "Hymenaeus-Preterism". Let me explain why that is an incorrect term. Hymenaeus and Philetus had wandered from the truth because they were teaching that the resurrection had passed while the temple was still standing. This goes hand in hand with Hebrews:

            Hebrews 9:8

            6When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry. 7But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. 8The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still standing.

            Within Full-Preterism the way into the Most Holy Place could only have done through atonement and not while the 2nd temple was still standing. The last sign of the Old Covenant had to be removed and the resurrection had to have occurred at that time. Nothing unholy could enter the most Holy place otherwise. Hymenaeus and Philetus were preaching that the resurrection(of the dead) had occurred already even before the temple was removed going against the very plan of God. This is why Full-Preterism cannot be labeled with the actions of Hymenaeus and Philetus because Full-Preterism believes the resurrection occurred after the 2nd temple or tabernacle as noted in Hebrews had been destroyed, not before.

            Also, here is a very important detail regarding the nature of the resurrection of the dead. Most of the Church today and the historic Church believed that the resurrection of the dead was a physical all eye seeing event that would be witnessed by all of humanity. If this was the original teaching then how could Hymenaeus and Philetus have been successful in their error? Let me explain, if the resurrection of the dead was a physical event of the dead and living rising from their graves and meeting the Lord how could Hymenaeus and Philetus have convinced anyone that the resurrection had occurred? They couldn't have, because no physical event like this ever happened. The only way that they did convince many that the resurrection was a past event was if the nature of it was not physical but a spiritual event. Full-Preterism simply believes that the resurrection of the dead was not a physical event but a spiritual event and the same as the first resurrection in Revelation 20.

            Revelation 20

            4I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

            To understand the first resurrection we must understand the first death which is not expanded upon here. The first death is believed by most to be our physical death on earth and the first resurrection is our bodily resurrection into heaven itself(there are other variations on this but most usually begin at our physical death.) I do not believe this as per scripture. Let me explain. To understand the first resurrection we must know what the first death was. The second death is mentioned here as having no power over those who partake in the first resurrection. The second death is revealed here:

            Revelation 20

            The Dead Are Judged

            11Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

            All agree that the second death is the lake of fire. Not all agree with what the first resurrection is which I believe to the same as the resurrection of the dead. To answer this question we must find the first death in scripture. It is not in Revelation, for that we must go back to the beginning in Genesis:

            Genesis 2 (septuagint into english)

            2:15 And the Lord God took the man whom he had formed, and placed him in the garden of Delight, to cultivate and keep it.
            2:16 And the Lord God gave a charge to Adam, saying, Of every tree which is in the garden thou mayest freely eat,
            2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil-- of it ye shall not eat, but in whatsoever day ye eat of it, ye shall surely die.

            God told Adam that on the day he ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil he would surely die. Did Adam physically die on the day he ate the fruit? No, he lived for another 400+ years but God does not lie. Adam did die on the day he ate the fruit, he died spiritually(as did all of humanty) and became separated from God through sin as nothing unholy can dwell with God. A consequence of the fall was physical death but that was not the first death in scripture. It was Adams spiritual death that occurred first and had to be atoned for. If the first death was not physical then the first resurrection must not be physical either, it must be spiritual to resurrect us from the first death(spiritual.) We know that this was only done through Christ from His atoning work on Calvary.

            This now harmonizes with Revelation. The second death has no hold on those that partake in the first resurrection(spiritual). Christ's atoning work on the Cross protects us from the second death(lake of fire) because we are now forgiven and worthy to be back in the presence of God through the work of Jesus Christ. When we are judged it is Christ's blood that covers us and we will be judged to be faithful servants through Him who died for us, Jesus. Revelation goes further and states that "blessed are those who have part in the first resurrection" since they will rule with Christ for a thousand years. We who partake in Christ's resurrection(our first resurrection) now reign with Jesus Christ. Even more so we are now resurrected from the dead. Not physical death but spiritual death. That is what I believe that the 1st century believers were waiting for and that which Hymenaeus and Philetus were in error as occurring before the 2nd(Herodian) temple was destroyed. We are now resurrected through Christ and the second death has no power over us and more importantly we are now with Him and He is within us.

            Just another point of interest, I believe that 1 Thessaloninans 4:13 which is usually attributed to being the rapture or the future second coming of Christ I believe to be fulfilled in the final act of atonement unto our salvation. I believe that the rapture or the meeting of the Lord in the air is the same event as the resurrection of the dead and the first resurrection and that occurred in the destruction of the Last sign of the Old Covenant, the temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. I can expand on 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 is you wish.

            God bless you brother!

            Comment


            • #7
              Romulus,

              Thanks again for your replies. I've checked with the powers that be, and we are allowed to play here in controversial issues. Let's play nice, and make sure that nobody goes near the heresy card.
              Hi Bing, I also had this discussion with the moderators in the moderator chat forum quite a while back and they did tell me I was allowed to expand on Full-Preterist arguments but only here in controversial issues and world religions. Thanks for the concern and I know we will have a informative discussion that we both can learn from. Thanks for not playing the heresy part, that means alot brother.

              I was wondering if I could get a little more clarification on some of my questions above:

              First, by "Orthodox Preterism" (which I realise is a hilariously ironic term) I meant the standard preterism spin. Basically, if I run into a full preterist, would he or she be likely to agree with you on most of the key issues?
              As a whole, yes most Full-Preterists would agree with me on these issues. The only difference disagreement we would have is the issue of the thousand years. Full-Preterists mostly believe that the period from the Cross to 70 A.D. was the thousand years which I do not agree with since that would mean the beast and the martyrdom under it/him had to occur at the time of the cross. I more agree with Partial-Preterists on that issue but I am still questioning where that part harmonizes with the other views I have. Anyhow, I am still in the Full-Preterist camp since I believe that the big three 1) second appearing 2) Resurrection of the dead 3) Judgment (70 A.D. and ongoing through history) have occurred already. This immediately throws my views into Full-Preterism. Full-Preterism also believes that the New Jerusalem, access to the tree of life began in 70 A.D. (some Partial-Preterists agree with this as well).

              Second, I think I understand your take on the second coming of Christ, the resurrection and the judgement. Which of these following scenarios best describes your belief:

              - Jesus is still coming, we will be resurrected and judged, but these events are not described in the Bible; the Bible only describes past comings and the first resurrection and the ongoing historical judgement.

              - Jesus is not coming back. He came spiritually, and we'll keep going until we die and go to heaven.
              Number 2. I think the issue that many have a hard time understanding from the Full-Preterist view is that there is no future physical coming of Christ when the outcome is the same hope of all Christians. It is simply in the nature of it. I believe that Jesus is with me, now and will never leave me or forsake me. Just because I do not see Him does not make this truth invalid. In fact, the fact that he is with me is in a greater reality then I could imagine. I am no longer separated from God through Jesus Christ. The physical manifestation of that relationship should be no different then the one God wants to have now with me today. In fact this real raltionship today is more important then the physical aspect of that relationship because God is spiritual, and the spiritual, contrary to what I was taught is a greater reality then the physical reality we all live in each day.

              Third, what is your interpretation of Revelation 21-22? Are they future or past? It would seem that these passages (and others like them, describing eternity) cannot have been fulfilled, even by the most symbolic interpretation.
              I am glad you asked this question since I have not been able to expand on this in end time chat. I will take each scripture and give you my opinion on why these cannot be future rather then why they are past.

              Revelation 21

              The New Jerusalem

              1Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away."

              I believe this to be a present reality. Is God with us? Are we His people? Is God our God?

              This scripture reminds us of:

              Jeremiah 31 (septuagint in to english)

              31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Juda:
              31:32 not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day when I took hold of their hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; for they abode not in my covenant, and I disregarded them, saith the Lord.
              31:33 For this is my covenant which I will make with the house of Israel; after those days, saith the Lord, I will surely put my laws into their mind, and write them on their hearts; and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people.
              31:34 And they shall not at all teach every one his [fellow] citizen, and every one his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them: for I will be merciful to their iniquities, and their sins I will remember no more.

              Isn't this a reality now? If we are looking for the physical aspect of it, then no. But if we look beyond the physical aspect and ask ourselves is this true now, in all reality, just because I can't see it, is it true? I believe it is.

              Anyhow let us expand:

              Revelation 21(NIV)

              22I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. 24The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. 26The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it. 27Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life.

              Revelation 21(CEV)

              24Nations will walk by the light of that city, and kings will bring their riches there. 25Its gates are always open during the day, and night never comes. 26The glorious treasures of nations will be brought into the city. 27But nothing unworthy will be allowed to enter. No one who is dirty-minded or who tells lies will be there. Only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life [d] will be in the city.

              How can this be future after the Millenium and the Final Judgement if sinners are outside of the city walls? They should have been judged and punished already but yet scripture states that outside of the walls are the unworthy(non-believers.) The New Jerusalem is the place where God dwells. There is no sin, and nothing impure is in it, but outside there is sin and the ungodly. Inside is where the lamb is it's light because Christ is dwelling within it. Full-Preterism believes this is a picture of the believer today. The city or the New Jerusalem is the bride of Christ, the Church. It is a picture of the reality that we share today. Christ is dwelling within us. We have been made new. Nothing impure can enter within us because He reigns within our hearts. Sin and the ungodly still exist outside of us but they cannot enter the presence that we as believers share in, the reign of Christ within out hearts that have been made perfect through the blood of Christ. It is not a physical city but a heavenly picture of the heavenly reality we all share in right now. Nothing impure can enter us because we are forgiven and Christ(the lamb) is our light. If this is future how could sin still exist outside of the physical walls when the Final Judgement has already occurred and the ungodly punished with the second death(lake of fire)? It could only exist outside if the city is a picture of a reality today when sin still exists as well as the unredeemed.

              Revelation 22

              1The angel showed me a river that was crystal clear, and its waters gave life. The river came from the throne where God and the Lamb were seated. 2Then it flowed down the middle of the city's main street. On each side of the river are trees [a] that grow a different kind of fruit each month of the year. The fruit gives life, and the leaves are used as medicine to heal the nations. 3God's curse will no longer be on the people of that city. He and the Lamb will be seated there on their thrones, and its people will worship God 4and will see him face to face. God's name will be written on the foreheads of the people. 5Never again will night appear, and no one who lives there will ever need a lamp or the sun. The Lord God will be their light, and they will rule forever.

              The same goes for access to the tree of life. Notice the scripture above is for the healing of the nations. If this was after the final judgement and the second coming and the destruction of the earth then what nations are left to heal? These nations would have been judged already and the new heavens and the earth would have come. Nothing sinful or ungodly nation would exist. The only explanantion is that this is also a reality now. Through the fall in Genesis we were separated from access to the tree of life(immortality). Here we have a picture of the reality that we have access again. This must be reality when the nations are still in need of healing. Can this fit the reality of the world today through believers? I believe it can. Do the nations need healing today? Do people need healing today? Of course. We through Christ have access to immortality or the redemption of our souls though Christ. We all will live forever due to Christ's atoning work on the Cross. The nations through the Church(New Jerusalem) will be witness the Gospel of Christ. The healing will be done through our preaching of life everlasting through our Lord Jesus Christ. We will heal the nations that are in darkness with the power of the Gospel. They will indeed be healed with the same knowledge that we have been healed by. This I don't believe to be a picture in the future but the reality that is true in Christ Jesus today. This goes hand in hand with the Church's mission today:

              Matthew 28

              The Great Commission

              16Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in[a] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

              God never said to disciple people but nations. He expects every nation to partake in the glorious work of His Son our Lord Jesus Christ. Will it take work on the Church's part, yes but all things are possible through Him who lives and reigns within us.

              God Bless you brother!
              Last edited by Romulus; Sep 24th 2007, 04:17 PM. Reason: Grammer

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                Hi Bing, I also had this discussion with the moderators in the moderator chat forum quite a while back and they did tell me I was allowed to expand on Full-Preterist arguments but only here in controversial issues and world religions. Thanks for the concern and I know we will have a informative discussion that we both can learn from. Thanks for not playing the heresy part, that means alot brother.
                I appreciate the way in which you have conducted yourself thus far in this conversation, friend. I might as well tell you here that I do believe that you are completely off in your theology and in extreme error, but you seem sincere, and so I can see nothing to gain in berating you or anything like that. My main purpose here on these forums is to strengthen my own understanding of theology and to test what I believe, so please tell me at once if you feel threatened or belittled by anything I say. I also believe in being honest, so if I don't believe something you say, I will tell you. I have been accused in the past of having an aggressive nature in discussion, and I want to make sure we don't end up degenerating into petty and fruitless squabbling.

                Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                Number 2. I think the issue that many have a hard time understanding from the Full-Preterist view is that there is no future physical coming of Christ when the outcome is the same hope of all Christians. It is simply in the nature of it.
                I'm trying to grasp your system here without questioning every jot that I disagree with, but I'm wondering here how this statement measures up against Acts 1:11?

                Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                I believe that Jesus is with me, now and will never leave me or forsake me. Just because I do not see Him does not make this truth invalid.
                Are you Trinitarian? Has not the role you described been filled by the Holy Spirit (John 16:7-14)? I'm not trying to begin an argument here, just wondering how your theology stacks against some other tenets of orthodoxcy here. It is my understanding that Matthew 28:20 describes the spiritual presence of the Lord within believers in the same way as John 16, and that God is with me now in an incomplete way, and that the greater experience is still to come, when, as in 1 John 3:2, we shall both see Him and be transformed into His likeness in the glorification. Paul speaks of this in Romans 8:23, and speaks of it as something yet to come - by this hope we were saved - and something both assured and future. What does your belief (as stated above) mean in conjunction with these scriptures and with the doctrine of glorification?

                Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                In fact, the fact that he is with me is in a greater reality then I could imagine. I am no longer separated from God through Jesus Christ. The physical manifestation of that relationship should be no different then the one God wants to have now with me today. In fact this real raltionship today is more important then the physical aspect of that relationship because God is spiritual, and the spiritual, contrary to what I was taught is a greater reality then the physical reality we all live in each day.
                If I said this was plain Gnosticism, would you be offended?

                Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                I am glad you asked this question since I have not been able to expand on this in end time chat. I will take each scripture and give you my opinion on why these cannot be future rather then why they are past.
                Before we go into a full study of these passages (which might need a separate thread - in fact, which will need a separate thread) I'll just let you know that I am Premillennial, and not entirely sure yet whether these passages are describing the Millennium or Eternity. My main point in bringing them up was the interesting observation that John implies God will eventually dwell with men (21:3) in a way different from the way He dwellt with men at the time of John's writing. I wonder if you claim a pre-70 AD date for Revelation to solve this? Or perhaps you have a different idea as to when the indwelling Spirit of God began living inside believers (I have only heard the interpretation that this happened in Acts 2).

                I appreciate your comments on Revelation 21 and 22. I read them and thought on them, but I would like to grasp some of the more fundamental aspects of your doctrine before I try an indepth exegesis with you!

                Thanks for all your time.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I appreciate the way in which you have conducted yourself thus far in this conversation, friend. I might as well tell you here that I do believe that you are completely off in your theology and in extreme error, but you seem sincere, and so I can see nothing to gain in berating you or anything like that. My main purpose here on these forums is to strengthen my own understanding of theology and to test what I believe, so please tell me at once if you feel threatened or belittled by anything I say. I also believe in being honest, so if I don't believe something you say, I will tell you. I have been accused in the past of having an aggressive nature in discussion, and I want to make sure we don't end up degenerating into petty and fruitless squabbling.
                  Thanks Bing. It is okay that we disagree on theology. Most of the historic Church has as well as the Church today and probably will for a long time. We all have one common, Jesus Christ and that is what is important. I hope your beliefs are strengthened and if they are challenged then they are challenged.

                  I'm trying to grasp your system here without questioning every jot that I disagree with, but I'm wondering here how this statement measures up against Acts 1:11?
                  This is scripture that is usually the cornerstone of of a physical return of Christ.

                  Acts 1:11 (KJV)

                  9And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

                  10And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;

                  11Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

                  Like manner seems to state not exactly like he left but that can be disputed. Even so, I believe an accurate view of verse 9 makes it more clear. A cloud received him was how Jesus ascended into heaven. He was taken away not as a body rising to the heavens and seen by the disciples but the cloud simply covered Him and He was gone. This was the exact opposite of a cloud coming. It was rather a cloud going. When Christ was to return it was as a cloud coming as stated in Matthew 24, Luke 21, Mark etc. I know you are familiar with the Partial-Preterist view of these scriptures and Full-Preterism simply sees the verse of a future coming of Christ hand in hand with the other cloud comings in scripture, not removing Acts 1:11 as a separate physical coming but as the same Christ coming in other scriptures. Full-Preterism only sees one Christ coming in scripture, not 2 or more. These "cloud comings" are the same as spoke about in Isaiah and Psalms by God before the Judgement of nations. The prophecies against Edom, Babylon, Nineveh also had cloud imagery and celestial signs but were always understood by their Jewish readers as apocalyptic language. These prophecies were fulfilled historically but the literal fulfillment of this language never happened. The nations I explained above do not exist anymore. They were Judged exactly as God said they would be andyet none of the cloud comings or celestial events ever happened. Full-Preterism simply uses the Old Testament as the key to understanding the New Testament. Partial-Preterists do the same but Full-Preterism does it consistantly with all scriptures including Acts 1:11.


                  Are you Trinitarian? Has not the role you described been filled by the Holy Spirit (John 16:7-14)? I'm not trying to begin an argument here, just wondering how your theology stacks against some other tenets of orthodoxcy here. It is my understanding that Matthew 28:20 describes the spiritual presence of the Lord within believers in the same way as John 16, and that God is with me now in an incomplete way, and that the greater experience is still to come, when, as in 1 John 3:2, we shall both see Him and be transformed into His likeness in the glorification. Paul speaks of this in Romans 8:23, and speaks of it as something yet to come - by this hope we were saved - and something both assured and future. What does your belief (as stated above) mean in conjunction with these scriptures and with the doctrine of glorification?
                  First off I believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. I reject "oneness" or "Jesus only" doctrine. I believe in the historic Church's belief of God as proclaimed in the Nicene Creed. Let us look at the scriptures you mentioned:

                  Matthew 28:20

                  20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

                  The translation of the greek word "aeon" is age, not world as stated above. It limits that Christ would be with them even until the end of the age or what I believe to be the Old Covenant age that was about to pass away. Jesus was with the Father but yet said that He would be with the believers until the end of the age. I believe that to be true but as you stated it was not complete yet. The atonement had to be completed for our salvation which is where the second appearing was "unto salvation" as written in Hebrews. That would be the fulfillment and the completion of our salvation. This is the issue that was very uncomfortable for me. When I believed the second appearing was future, Hebrews was clear that the second appearing was "unto salvation". If Christ didn't come yet then we did not have salvation. That I believe to be completed at the end of the age in 70 A.D. This was now after the end of the age. Was Jesus still with us, yes but I believe in a greater way now that Salvation was complete. We were now reconciled with heaven itself and God our Father. We were changed so we could be with our Father through Jesus Christ. We now had access to the Holy of Holies which was the presence of God. That was what all humanity was waiting for since the fall.

                  John 16:16

                  16A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.

                  This I believe was seeing Jesus exactly as he is because we were now through His blood able to be in the presence of God. Prior to 70 A.D. we were not worthy to be in the presence of God yet. Jesus did make the final sacrifice but yet our salvation was not complete until the removal of the Old Covenant whose last sign was removed in 70 A.D.

                  Romans 28


                  23And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

                  I believe that the body here is not speaking of our physical body. Before I get accused of Gnosticism which I believe was the accusation in your next post we must look at other scripture if it conflicts with the understanding of redemption.

                  1 Peter 1

                  7That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ:

                  8Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory: 9Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

                  Hebrews 10:39

                  39But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.


                  The appearing would be in the redemption of our souls, not our bodies. Here we have second appearing once again. If it did not occur we do not forgiveness of sins and access to the holy of holies or the very throne of God. This could only be accomplished if sin has been atoned for. Notice how Romans 28 states that we were waiting to be adopted. Adopted as what? Well Romans is clear in another passage that it was as "our adoption as sons".

                  I am going to ask you a question that I believe may make my point clearer. If our bodies need redemption then where does sin lie? Is it not sin that dwells in our hearts and corrupts our souls? If our physical bodies as noted in the Romans 28:23 scripture is what is needed as part of redemption and would complete our salvation then the conclusion that must be accepted is that sin resides in our physical bodies and not just/only in our spirit. Is it our physical bodies that need to be redeemed or our spirit/soul?

                  If I said this was plain Gnosticism, would you be offended?
                  Gnosticism is the idea of a "gnosis" or a spiritual knowledge to a learned few. Basically that salvation was achieved through knowledge and revealed that the spirit was separate from the body. A better way to state it is that the spirit was trapped within a sinful existence and waiting to be freed. This was deemed as un-biblical and contrary to scripture. I must state that Fulll-Preterism is not gnosticism as I don't believe that the spirit is separate from the body. Scripturally they are together. The actions of the flesh are in agreement with the soul and vice versa and each effects the other for better or for worse. Gnosticism does not believe this. Also, I believe that once we have been redeemed an inner struggle begins between both flesh and spirit. This is in agreement with what Paul wrote as struggling with sin and "I do what I do not want to do". Christianity as a whole does believe though that after the body passes away(back to dust) that the spirit remains and is given a spiritual body in heaven. I believe this as well, the only difference is that I believe that we already have that body through Christ through redemption. It was the redemption of our spirit that I believe is presented with the concept of a spiritual body and instead of believing in the physical aspect of it I believe in the reality of it now. We have access to heaven itself and God himself, how could that be unless we have been redeemed fully? The Gnostics believed that the body was irrelvent and the spirit is what was separate from it. This led into many new age ideas which I totally reject. The spirit and soul are connected as one and that is how God created humanity in scripture. The flesh is not separate from the soul. It simply was the corruption of one that determined the corruption of the other and that is what needed to be redeemed for the reconciliation between heaven and earth or God and humanity. Gnosticism rejects this idea and that is why I cannot accept this idea. Scripture was clear that the second appearing(coming) was our blessed hope. That blessed hope was our redemption from sin and our reconciliation to God Himself through Jesus Christ. If the blessed hope was in the redemption of our physical bodies we open up another can of worms as to what needed redemption which I know Christianity rejects but that is the implication. redemption is our blessed hope and that was fulfilled in Christ. Now comes our mission. We must live out not just spiritually but physically the truth that is within us. We do not love just with our spirits but with our bodies as well. Love is a manifestation not just in the spiritual but in the physical. Faith which is spiritual must also be shown in works as the scriptures state. If it did not, then the faith in which we profess is dead. Of course it is not works that save us but faith showing itself through works. There must be a relationship between the truth that is within and the world that is outside without the truth. We must step out and change the world with the Love that has been shown us first. The love of Christ.

                  I must admit that at times Full-Preterism may sound like gnosticism but I hope that I explained clearly that it is not. Full-Preterism has the same requirements for redemption as all other orthodox views of scripture. It simply makes our redemption completed not at the redemption of the body but of sin atoned for once and for all in the New Covenant that is true today. It also realizes the reality of God's Kingdom not within the physical aspects of a changed world but in the change made by the participants in the Kingdom, us as we proclaim the Gospel to the world. The world is changed not by the physical changing of the earth but by the children of God living out the Gospel of Christ and bringing others into that glorious completed work.


                  Before we go into a full study of these passages (which might need a separate thread - in fact, which will need a separate thread) I'll just let you know that I am Premillennial, and not entirely sure yet whether these passages are describing the Millennium or Eternity. My main point in bringing them up was the interesting observation that John implies God will eventually dwell with men (21:3) in a way different from the way He dwellt with men at the time of John's writing. I wonder if you claim a pre-70 AD date for Revelation to solve this? Or perhaps you have a different idea as to when the indwelling Spirit of God began living inside believers (I have only heard the interpretation that this happened in Acts 2).
                  I believe they are describing the Millenium or reign of christ. I believe in a pre-70 A.D. for Revelations writing. As I stated before I believe that God dwelling with men is a present reality.

                  I appreciate your comments on Revelation 21 and 22. I read them and thought on them, but I would like to grasp some of the more fundamental aspects of your doctrine before I try an indepth exegesis with you!

                  Thanks for all your time.
                  Anytime Bing! I hope we can discuss them at another time. God Bless you!
                  Last edited by Romulus; Sep 25th 2007, 08:25 PM. Reason: More Clarity

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Dear Romulus:

                    I will be back in this thread, eventually...just have my hands full for the moment.

                    gr

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                      This is scripture that is usually the cornerstone of of a physical return of Christ.

                      Acts 1:11 (KJV)

                      9And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

                      10And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;

                      11Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

                      Like manner seems to state not exactly like he left but that can be disputed. Even so, I believe an accurate view of verse 9 makes it more clear. A cloud received him was how Jesus ascended into heaven. He was taken away not as a body rising to the heavens and seen by the disciples but the cloud simply covered Him and He was gone.

                      That seems like a very subtle omission. When I read Acts 1, I read "when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight."

                      Either way, I'm uncertain as to how you have explained this scripture. Let us pretend for a moment that Jesus was not "lifted up" and that His body did not firework up into the air before the clouds covered Him. Let us assume that Jesus was in the middle of a mountainside chat with the disciples when a cloud rolled down over Him and He vanished.

                      The angel tells them that's how He's coming the next time, or else somehow very much like it.

                      From that, we can deduce certain things. Jesus was on the earth in a physical and material body, glorified and renewed from the agony of death that He had defeated from His ordeal on the Cross. Right? He was taken up, still clothed in that body. Right? Whether He went up or the cloud came down is immaterial. The angel said "This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come IN THE SAME WAY as you saw him go into heaven."

                      I'm reading the ESV here, but even if we are to use the KJV, the words translated "in the same way" or "in like manner" simply mean "that way/manner." The simplest translation would thus read "This Jesus who was taken up from you into heaven will come in the way you saw Him go."

                      I am in a generous disposition. Let us imagine that the angel only meant "in a sort-of similar way." That would still bear some resemblance to the fundamentals of His assumption into glory, would it not? He would still, say, have a physical body? He would still descend with the clouds? He would interact with humanity face to face?

                      I am perplexed as to how you have interpreted "in the same way" as "in a completely different way." Help me out here.

                      Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                      This was the exact opposite of a cloud coming. It was rather a cloud going.

                      Right.

                      Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                      When Christ was to return it was as a cloud coming as stated in Matthew 24, Luke 21, Mark etc. I know you are familiar with the Partial-Preterist view of these scriptures and Full-Preterism simply sees the verse of a future coming of Christ hand in hand with the other cloud comings in scripture, not removing Acts 1:11 as a separate physical coming but as the same Christ coming in other scriptures.

                      Right. I think you overestimate my knowledge of Full Preterism, but I think I'm on board with you here.

                      Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                      Full-Preterism only sees one Christ coming in scripture, not 2 or more. These "cloud comings" are the same as spoke about in Isaiah and Psalms by God before the Judgement of nations.

                      Now, I was about to bring up Isaiah 19, but it seems you already have. This seems like an excellent time to bring up some past scriptures regarding Jesus "coming with the clouds."

                      The Exodus to the Tabernacle

                      Exclusively, every time "clouds" are mentioned, the coming of the Lord is described, not in judgement but in communion. In Exodus 14:24 the Lord destroys the attacking Egyptians from the cloud, but the cloud is still present as a visible and tangible sign, and this event is in context with the Lord's guidance of the people. In Exodus 19:9 we find that the Lord Himself was not the cloud, but veiled Himself with the cloud so that the people could have a direct experience with the Supernatural God. Likewise in Exodus 34:5 the Lord came in the cloud to declare His name.

                      Everything in these accounts suggested that the Lord came literally wrapped in a cloud and communed directly with His people. Even throughout the age of Kings, cloud was attributed to the manifestation of the glory of God inside the Tabernacle. In Numbers 11, 12 and 14 God is said to stand "face to face" with the elders and with Moses and with Miriam and Aaron, speaking with them directly and even eating with them (cf. Exodus 24:11).

                      The Prophets

                      You suggest that judgement is the context for most clouds in the Old Testament, yet in Isaiah 4:5 the cloud described is like the guiding cloud of the Exodus account, and appears in the day that the Branch of the Lord is made beautiful and glorious. The Branch of the Lord is universally acclaimed by Christians to be Jesus (Isa 11:1), and I see no reason to stray from this interpretation. Indeed, the glorification of the Branch seems in keeping with the event described in Habakkuk 2:14, that the "earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD as the waters cover the sea." Even by the staunchest of preterist doctrines this cannot have yet come to pass without watering down the prophecy to positively milquetoast levels. Regardless, the "cloud" is a cloud of protection and intimate communion over the city of Jerusalem, not an impersonal judgement against the Lord's enemies.

                      I do not believe that Isaiah 19:1 has yet come to pass. You claim to have consistent hermeneutics compared with partial preterists (who I agree are horribly inconsistent) and yet to suggest that the Prophets were indiscriminately symbolic and then literal is to attain the very problem you accuse others of. You say that the cloud is figuratively and arbitrarily used as a euphamism for judgement. What are the grounds for this? Excepting similies, we have as yet come upon no uses of "cloud" as used symbolically in any book of the Bible. The Nile has never dried up (v. 5). Which five cities in Egypt have unilaterally and without exception given their allegiance to the Lord (v. 18)?

                      Most telling of all, these things are to come about in a clearly visible and obvious way. They are to be a sign and a wonder that can be easily recognisable and yet likewise inexplicable to all who see them (v. 20). Egypt at large will come to the Lord (vv. 20-22) - something that has never been historically realised. It seems that the evidence is stentorian: Isaiah 19 describes a future, physical and literal coming of the Lord, in which Jesus will come to Egypt upon a cloud. I would suggest that this is the answer to Acts 1:11 that has thus far eluded you.

                      The Lamentations have the only use of clouds (outside of the obviously prevalent similes throughout the Bible) that I can see show them used as a shrouding or preventative utility. Even this accompanies, rather than presaging, judgement. Throughout Ezekiel the use of cloud imagery seems completely literal (nee similes), and entirely appropriate in keeping with the precedent for clouds used in the days of the Tabernacle; the indication of the manifest glory of the Holy God. The Wisdom books (Psalms, Job, Proverbs, etc) are again almost entirely consistent, using cloud imagery either as clear similes (like, as, etc) or as simple physical and scientific reflections on the power of the God who makes the clouds rain down on the earth.

                      The clearest use of cloud imagery in the prophetic books of the Old Testament is in Daniel 7:13 where the Son of Man (Jesus) is shown coming with the clouds of heaven. This is of course what Jesus alludes to in Matthew 24:30 and Mark 13:26 as His coming. This is what incensed the High Priest in Matthew 26:64, who recognised it as Daniel's Messianic and divine prophecy. This is what Stephen mentioned that enraged the Sanhedrin in Acts 7:56. But let us interpret the heightened apocalyptic language of Daniel consistently. If Daniel 7 is to be taken as a parallel to Daniel 2, then we can open the debates as to who the various parts of the statue are, what the bear is, what the ribs in its mouth are...the whole debacle.

                      I'd rather not.

                      I think we both agree that the Son of Man in Daniel 7 is Jesus. I think we can both agree that the Rock that smashes the earthly kingdoms into rubble is also Jesus. Remember Daniel 2:35 - "the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth." No matter how we come at it, we are back at Habakkuk 2:14 and the eventual saturation of the entire world with the knowledge of the glory of God. There is a direct link then, between Daniel 7:13 and the Son of Man coming with the clouds and Daniel 2:35 and the eternal, manifest and total victory of Jesus over the earthly kingdoms of the world.

                      My contention is that this is what the angels were speaking about in Acts 1:11 when they foretold Jesus coming with the clouds in the same way as He had just left.

                      Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                      The prophecies against Edom, Babylon, Nineveh also had cloud imagery and celestial signs but were always understood by their Jewish readers as apocalyptic language.

                      Apocalyptic language and Jewish readers aside, I trust that the Jews had understanding of similes and metaphors. Now metaphors can be contended, but we have already shown that almost all of the references to clouds in the Old Testament are either similes (like a cloud, as a cloud, etc) or else references that I am prepared to accept as future and literal. Unless you can provide me with some exceptions?

                      Originally posted by Romulus View Post
                      These prophecies were fulfilled historically but the literal fulfillment of this language never happened. The nations I explained above do not exist anymore. They were Judged exactly as God said they would be and yet none of the cloud comings or celestial events ever happened. Full-Preterism simply uses the Old Testament as the key to understanding the New Testament. Partial-Preterists do the same but Full-Preterism does it consistantly with all scriptures including Acts 1:11.
                      So, your contention is the same as my explanation. They never happened, the conditions for their fulfillment are no longer available, ergo they must have been symbolic, despite a consistent application of cloud imagery to be read as literal and communicative rather than symbolic and judgemental?

                      Can it be assumed then, that your sole contention against the interpretation of a literal and future application of these Old Testament prophecies is the fact that the nations in question (and therefore the prerequisites for the prophetic fulfillments) never existed? A simple yes or no answer for this one will suffice; I would like to take it further.

                      I shall get back to you later (probably some days later - I have a hectic schedule) on the rest of your salient points as answered above.

                      Thanks, Romulus!

                      Oh, and settle a bet for me: Star Trek fan, or Ancient Roman mythology fan?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        very interesting

                        [quote=Romulus;1387878]Hi Bing,

                        Sorry I couldn't answer your question in End Times Chat but I wanted to abide with forum rules.

                        No I don't believe they will happen in the future because I believe they already happened in 70 A.D. The scriptures that speak of a second appearing and the resurrection of the dead I believe(full preterism) to be of a spiritual nature and not a physical one.

                        I have to admit, I thought abuot this a while back on my own...never knew it was an established thoery.

                        I know you are aware of the partial-preterist point of view but that view leaves 1 Thessalonians 4:13 (rapture) as future and the Hebrews "second appearing(coming)" as future where I believe they were fulfilled. Heresy gets thrown around alot because the physical aspect of these events has been so drilled into Churches that believing in the unseen aspect of it is inconceivable. I do believe there is scripture proving these points but that I can explain only if you wish to further this thread.

                        Also, the Judgement scene in Revelation I don't believe to be a final judgment but a judgement that began in 70 A.D. with the "dead in Christ" and the unfaithful dead and is now ongoing on through history as each person dies and is immediately judged and then enters paradise or the second death(lake of fire). Notice how Revelation 20 never says "final judgment" or that it occurs once. John is only shown a picture of the judgement at that time. The events shown after such as the New Jerusalem and access to the tree of life happened in 70 A.D. as well(IMO). There is scriptural details that support this that I can share but again only if you or someone else wishes.

                        Question- so when we die, we immediately face judgement...Christ appears to us at death?

                        In answer I do believe in the 2nd appearing(coming), resurrection of the dead, judgement, New Jerusalem, and access to the tree of life, but that they occurred in the 1st century. The nature of them is also a spiritual event rather then a physical event.
                        Can you explain this more in simple terms?

                        Here is is my take on it from your point of view.... This is fascinating and intersting to study.

                        The resurection of beleivers is the second birth....being born again, alive in Christ. We are spiritually ressurected from the dead.

                        New Jeruseluem is the Church, the body of Chrst, that we are born again in to.

                        The tree of life is Spiritual meaning that all born again beleivers have access to it though Christ.

                        Can you add more to this? And how does 70 AD fit in- I know Jeruselem was destroyed in 70 AD, but what else?

                        God Bless

                        Alaina

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Romulus,

                          I have read about this before...and have considered it too.

                          Question- Could the book of Revelation be an overview of salvation. A view of a great war between good and evil, God and satan.

                          I have never thought of the entire book as literal.......so hear me out on this, please

                          The letters to the Churches show us how to endure until the end.....that would be until we die.

                          He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

                          I have always felt these messages were to all the churches for the time of pentecost on.


                          The rest of Revelation shows us an overview of the entire New Testament, so to speak. How to be saved, death and hell.

                          Question- how do you interpet the mark of the beast and buying and selling?

                          I am looking foward to learning more and discussing this with you.

                          God Bless

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hi Bing,

                            Sorry I couldn't answer your question in End Times Chat but I wanted to abide with forum rules.

                            No I don't believe they will happen in the future because I believe they already happened in 70 A.D. The scriptures that speak of a second appearing and the resurrection of the dead I believe(full preterism) to be of a spiritual nature and not a physical one.

                            I have to admit, I thought abuot this a while back on my own...never knew it was an established thoery.
                            Hi Alaina(cute cat),

                            This theory is known as Full-Preterism. It believes all of scripture was fulfilled in the atoning work of Christ and at His second appearing in 70 A.D.(spiritual). It is forbidden to be debated in End Times Chat so I am limited to dicussing it here, which is what Bing and I have been doing. Read our posts as well that explain alot of what I believe.

                            I know you are aware of the partial-preterist point of view but that view leaves 1 Thessalonians 4:13 (rapture) as future and the Hebrews "second appearing(coming)" as future where I believe they were fulfilled. Heresy gets thrown around alot because the physical aspect of these events has been so drilled into Churches that believing in the unseen aspect of it is inconceivable. I do believe there is scripture proving these points but that I can explain only if you wish to further this thread.

                            Also, the Judgement scene in Revelation I don't believe to be a final judgment but a judgement that began in 70 A.D. with the "dead in Christ" and the unfaithful dead and is now ongoing on through history as each person dies and is immediately judged and then enters paradise or the second death(lake of fire). Notice how Revelation 20 never says "final judgment" or that it occurs once. John is only shown a picture of the judgement at that time. The events shown after such as the New Jerusalem and access to the tree of life happened in 70 A.D. as well(IMO). There is scriptural details that support this that I can share but again only if you or someone else wishes.

                            Question- so when we die, we immediately face judgement...Christ appears to us at death?
                            Yes. There is no waiting place anymore since Jesus fulfilled the requirements for humanity to be back in the presence of God the Father. If we are still awaiting our bodily resurrection then when we die we cannot enter paradise and (Bing may wish to interject) must await the bodily resurrection of the faithful at the second coming of Christ. This does not make sense to me as I believe the Judgement of mankind is ongoing since 70 A.D. and taking place at each persons death. We are now judged and enter the place prepared for us by Jesus or into the lake of fire(second death). I don't believe hades exists anymore but only prior to the 70 A.D. coming of Christ when the atonement was not yet complete. After it was, man was made holy by the blood of Jesus to enter the presenceof God again. All was accomplished.

                            In answer I do believe in the 2nd appearing(coming), resurrection of the dead, judgement, New Jerusalem, and access to the tree of life, but that they occurred in the 1st century. The nature of them is also a spiritual event rather then a physical event.
                            Can you explain this more in simple terms?
                            Read the post above that I explained above shows a little more detail. The 2nd appearing was the judgement coming in 70 A.D. against the nation of Israel and the temple. The temple was the last sign of the Old Covenant and was the sign that it was no longer valid and that Jesus now lived with His people. The resurrection of the dead was not a physical event but a spiritual one where our spirits were redeemed by Christ's work on Calvery and occurred in the final act of atonement by Jesus, his appearing in 70 A.D. His coming was not literal as Judgement comings in the Old Testament were never literal but occurred through heathan armies sent by God. In this case, the Roman armies who destroyed Jerusalem.

                            Here is is my take on it from your point of view.... This is fascinating and intersting to study.

                            The resurection of beleivers is the second birth....being born again, alive in Christ. We are spiritually ressurected from the dead.

                            New Jeruseluem is the Church, the body of Chrst, that we are born again in to.

                            The tree of life is Spiritual meaning that all born again beleivers have access to it though Christ.


                            Wow! You sure your not full-preterist? I believe the same. The resurrection of the dead I believe to be the same event as the first resurrection in Revelation which is our spiritual resurrection from the first death, the spiritual death of Adam.

                            The New Jerusalem I believe to be a picture of the believer today, not a literal city that will come down from heaven.

                            The tree of life is what existed in the garden of which we have access to now which is eternal life through Christ and is for the healing of the nations. How could it be after the second coming, the New heavens and the new earth, and final judgement when the nations would have been judged already and removed? They would not need healing but they need healing today don't they?

                            Can you add more to this? And how does 70 AD fit in- I know Jeruselem was destroyed in 70 AD, but what else?

                            God Bless

                            Alaina


                            70 A.D was the removal of the last sign of the Old Covenant, the temple in Jerusalem. It fulfills the following scripture in Hebrews:

                            Hebrews 9

                            6When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry. 7But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. 8The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still standing.

                            The way into the most holy place was access to God Himself. To be in His presence and with God was the hope of all humanity before the completion of Christ's work. The reconciliation between God and man could not happen while the first tabernacle(Old Covenant) was still standing. The destruction of the temple showed that the way into the most holy place(God's presence) was complete.


                            Romulus,

                            I have read about this before...and have considered it too.

                            Question- Could the book of Revelation be an overview of salvation. A view of a great war between good and evil, God and satan.

                            I have never thought of the entire book as literal.......so hear me out on this, please

                            It is an overview of Salvation but also a I believe a worship service and how we are to live today. It is heavenly literature potraying an actual event in 70 A.D.

                            The letters to the Churches show us how to endure until the end.....that would be until we die.

                            He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

                            I have always felt these messages were to all the churches for the time of pentecost on.


                            I believe that the message was to the Churches then existing in the 1st century. They were to witness the events unfolding. They do not exist today. The message was to the persecuted Churches in the time of the Roman empire. I believe any Church can fall in to the state that each Church was in but the audience was these Churches specifically prior to 70 A.D. not today.


                            The rest of Revelation shows us an overview of the entire New Testament, so to speak. How to be saved, death and hell.


                            Wel i take the view that it presents the fufillment of atonement for us and the judgement against the Harlot(unfaithful Israel).

                            Question- how do you interpet the mark of the beast and buying and selling?

                            I am looking foward to learning more and discussing this with you.

                            God Bless
                            To understand the mark of the beast we must look at those marked for the Lord. Does God need to mark those that are His physically with a microchip, tatoo, etc. ? No, He marks his own spiritually. God knows who are his. If the mark of the Lord is spiritual then the mark of the beast is also spiritual. If the mark of the beast is a physical mark, then we must be marked physically as well which I don't believe to be the case.

                            God Bless!
                            Last edited by Romulus; Oct 10th 2007, 12:30 AM. Reason: Forgot a "no" in a thought.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              This theory is known as Full-Preterism. It believes all of scripture was fulfilled in the atoning work of Christ and at His second appearing in 70 A.D.(spiritual). It is forbidden to be debated in End Times Chat so I am limited to dicussing it here, which is what Bing and I have been doing. Read our posts as well that explain alot of what I believe.



                              Yes. There is waiting place anymore since Jesus fulfilled the requirements for humanity to be back in the presence of God the Father. If we are still awaiting our bodily resurrection then when we die we cannot enter paradise and (Bing may wish to interject) must await the bodily resurrection of the faithful at the second coming of Christ. This does not make sense to me as I believe the Judgement of mankind is ongoing since 70 A.D. and taking place at each persons death
                              I have always agreed with this to, it is appointed for man to die and then face judgement.

                              The thief on the cross was told today you will be with me in paradise...paradise is the paradise of Genises. It is heaven.


                              . We are now judged and enter the place prepared for us by Jesus or into the lake of fire(second death). I don't believe hades exists anymore but only prior to the 70 A.D. coming of Christ when the atonement was not yet complete. After it was, man was made holy by the blood of Jesus to enter the presenceof God again. All was accomplished.

                              That is why we don't need the blood of animals or an earthly temple. Jesus is the sacrifice- any other would trample on his death. I beleive that is why satan wants the jews to return to animal sacrifice again. It would mock Jesus, basically saying His death meant nothing.



                              Read the post above that I explained above shows a little more detail. The 2nd appearing was the judgement coming in 70 A.D. against the nation of Israel and the temple.

                              Did- Jesus descend in the clouds, as he told his dicsiples he would? What about every eye will behold him.....is this an anology to death...or literal?

                              70 A.D was the removal of the last sign of the Old Covenant, the temple in Jerusalem. It fulfills the following scripture in Hebrews:





                              To understand the mark of the beast we must look at those marked for the Lord. Does God need to mark those that are His physically with a microchip, tatoo, etc. ? No, He marks his own spiritually. God knows who are his. If the mark of the Lord is spiritual then the mark of the beast is also spiritual. If the mark of the beast is a physical mark, then we must be marked physically as well which I don't believe to be the case.

                              I have always beleived this...the mark is not literal. In the same way God seals His servants, Satan marks his. You either bear the image of Christ or Satan.

                              2Cor.1
                              1. [22] Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.
                              Eph.1
                              1. [13] In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,


                              No where in scripture does God physically mark someone and how would you physically seal someone....? You can't it has to be spiritual. I have actually posted on this before.


                              Last questions- How do you interpet the Day of the Lord in the Old Testament. Is that 70 AD to you?

                              Will this earth burn up in a ferverent heat and the heavens dissolve as spoken about Peter?

                              2Pet.3
                              10] But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
                              [11] Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
                              [12] Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
                              [13] Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
                              [14] Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.


                              is this literal in your view or spiritual- I wouls live to hear your view.

                              God Bless,
                              Alaina


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X