Preterist heretical?

So if you die with your left arm missing, James, do you expect to be resurrected the same way? If you are going to use that argument, then you are stuck without a left arm.

Jesus was proving that it was indeed He that was resurrected. No such proof is necessary in our cases. Jesus no longer bears those marks in his glorified state today as He is no longer in a flesh and blood body as He was when He was resurrected.

As the Bible says, "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God". I wish Christians would simply believe God. </font>[/QUOTE]Mat 18:8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.
Mat 18:9 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

If I pluck my eye out because it offends me, and I enter into life having one eye, do I get my other eye back later? I don't know what my resurrected body will be like, but I do know that I didn't get it in AD70. Flesh and blood will not inherit the kingdom, that doesn't mean the kingdom will not be a literal physical kingdom on this earth. And spiritual does not mean it will be an invisible ghostly body that flies through the netherworld. Spiritual is that which pertains to the spirit. If you walk after the spirit instead of after the flesh, does that mean you are a ghost?

Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

Whatever His resurrection was like, that is what ours will be like also.

Total preterists believe this is the kingdom, so you tell me who has inherited what.

 

If you mean as in dispensational premillennialism, I don't believe that.

 

Rev 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

The bible says that the overcoming saints will reign with Christ on the earth for 1000 years.

Matthew 5
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

The bible says you must be righteous, or you won't be in that kingdom.

What we believe and what is true are often two different things. If what you believe is true, I hardly see what could happen to me. If what I believe is true, there may be a lot of sorry Christians at the judgment seat who are not going to be reigning with their Lord.

 

When I was a member of the Church of Christ denomination the same argument was often used to justify their beliefs about baptism, acapella singing, weekly observance of the Lord's Supper, etc.

Sorry, but that line of argumentation no longer works on me.

 

It isn't an argument, it is the truth. The argument was the scripture I posted. When will people start believing the bible?

 

Says you.

Sorry, but I'll take my chances believing the what the Bible actually says, instead of your interpretation.

 

Good question:

Rev 1:1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass ; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
3Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

James 5:8Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.

I John 2:18Little children, it is the last time : and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time .

I Cor 7: 29But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none; 30And they that weep, as though they wept not; and they that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy, as though they possessed not .31And they that use this world, as not abusing it: for the fashion of this world passeth away.

You see, I could ask you the same thing. Why don't you believe the Bible? Can we agree that we all accept the Bible as truth and understand that the difference is in our interpretation?

 

How long is shortly? A day? A week? A year?

2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

It has only been 2 days since He left.

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
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.

God hasn't burned us up yet, because He is longsuffering. He wants all to come to repentence. But His patience will run out.

(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.

If all this came to pass in AD70, then that means we are in the new heavens and the new earth now... where is all the righteousness?

 

No more so than Darbyism.

 

Righteousness doesn't exist in the New Covenant?

Completely out of context. see Ps. 90:1-4

However using your formula the 1000 year reign could be 1 day. Right?

 

You would have a better argument there. The point being that 'shortly' to God may not be what we would consider shortly. Also, there is no denying that the events of AD70 were a partial fulfillment of prophecy. The problem is that preterism has to spiritualize a lot of events in order to claim that they ALL came to pass. There is no good reason for this, as elsewhere in the Bible, we see that when God declares something will come to pass, it comes to pass literaly, even if there is a near-term partial fulfillment.

As a preterist, what do you look for in the future? Anything? How do you explain such strange happenings as Israel being back in their land, and technology advancing so rapidly and bringing forth the capability to implement a mark just as described in revelation? This surely must seem a strange coincidence to you?

And 2Peter 3:8 is exactly in the context of the second coming.

 

Yes, the Bible teaches that God is outside the realm of time. However we are bound by the time-space constraints placed upon us. When God chooses to communicate to His creation, who are bound by time constraints, does He do so in a manner that His creation would understand? I would think so. Your view says no, God leaves us in confusion by communicating with us in His non-time realm. Therefore leaving the words meaningless to us.

Do the events of AD70 fulfill any OT prophecies?

The Old Covenant was a physical type and shadow of the coming spiritual New Covenant. Literal fulfillment does not have to be physical. Besides components of the New Covenant are spiritual.

Jer. 31:33But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts ; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Was it literally written? No. Was it literally fulfilled? Yes.

The Old Covenant Law was physically written in stone, the New Covenant Law is spiritually written on the heart.

Circumcision follows the same pattern, physical to spiritual when changing the Covenants:

Romans 2:29No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code.

I Cor. 15:46Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

The Temple was a physical type of a coming spiritual Temple:

I Peter 2: 5Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house , an holy priesthood , to offer up spiritual sacrifices , acceptable to God by Jesus Christ........9But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation , a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

Priesthood, sacrifices, chosen Nation were all physical types of the spiritual realities of the New Covenant.

My outlook would be more positive than an earth-ending Apocolytic destruction that my friends, neighbors, and family might have to endure.

Eph 3:20Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, 21to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations , for ever and ever! Amen.

The United Nations. Perhaps you can show me where atheist and agnostic modern Israel fulfills any prophecy.

Who are those people living in modern day Israel?

Encyclopedia Brittanica (1973)
'The Jews As A Race: The findings of physical anthropology show that, contrary to the popular view, there is no Jewish race. Anthropornetric measurements of Jewish groups in many parts of the world indicate that they differ greatly from one another with respect to all the important physical characteristics." (vol. 12, page 1054)

Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem (1971)
"It is a common assumption, and one that sometimes seems ineradicable even in the face of evidence to the contrary, that the Jews of today constitute a race, a homogeneous entity easily recognizable. From the preceding discussion of the origin and early history of the Jews, it should be clear that in the course of their formation as a people and a nation they had already assimilated a variety of racial strains from people moving into the general area they occupied. This had taken place by interbreeding and then by conversion to Judaism of a considerable number of communities. . . .

"Thus, the diversity of the racial and genetic attributes of various Jewish colonies of today renders any unified racial classification of them a contradiction in terms. Despite this, many people readily accept the notion that they are a distinct race. This is probably reinforced by the fact that some Jews are recognizably different in appearance from the surrounding population. That many cannot be easily identified is overlooked and the stereotype for some is extended to all - a not uncommon phenomenon" (Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem, 1971, vol. 3, p. 50).

Encyclopedia Americana (1986)
"Racial and Ethnic Considerations. Some theorists have considered the Jews a distinct race, although this has no factual basis. In every country in which the Jews lived for a considerable time, their physical traits came to approximate those of the indigenous people. Hence the Jews belong to several distinct racial types, ranging, for example, from fair to dark. Among the reasons for this phenomenon are voluntary or involuntary miscegenation and the conversion of Gentiles to Judaism" (Encyclopedia Americana, 1986, vol. 16, p. 71).

Collier's Encyclopedia (1977)
"A common error and persistent modern myth is the designation of the Jews as a 'race! This is scientifically fallacious, from the standpoint of both physical and historical tradition. Investigations by anthropologists have shown that Jews are by no means uniform in physical character and that they nearly always reflect the physical and mental characteristics of the people among whom they five" (Collier's Encyclopedia, 1977, vol. 13, p. 573).

H.G. Wells
"There can be little doubt that the scattered Phoenicians in Spain and Africa and throughout the Mediterranean, speaking as they did a language closely akin to Hebrew and being deprived of their authentic political rights, became proselytes to Judaism. For phases of vigorous proselytism alternated with phases of exclusive jealousy in Jewish history. On one occasion the Idumeans, being conquered, were all forcibly made Jews. There were Arab tribes who were Jews in the time of Muhammad, and a Thrkish people who were mainly Jews in South Russia in the ninth century. Judaism is indeed the reconstructed political ideal of many shattered peoples - mainly Semitic.... The main part of Jewry never was in Judea and had never come out of Judea" (The Outline of History, p. 505).

Yes, when I was a Dispie. However then I read of a similiar mark in the OT and put 2 and 2 together.

Ex 13:9And it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thine hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes, that the LORD's law may be in thy mouth: for with a strong hand hath the LORD brought thee out of Egypt.

Dt. 6:8 Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads.

Dt. 11:18 Fix these words of mine in your hearts and minds; tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads.

Literal or Symbolic?

What about this one? Technology involved?

Rev 14:1Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.

 

I dont know where to start there, Grasshopper... I guess at the top.

First of all, we do understand, it's not so difficult. Second, where does God say in His word that He is going to spell things out nice and easy for anyone? Jesus said He taught in parables so they WOULDN'T understand. We are told to study to show ourselves approved. The word of God is deep, brother, and therein is contained mysteries.

I'm sure there were propbably some hits on prophecies in the OT. Maybe you could show us some examples, and we could chew on them.

You are mixing pictures in the OT with prophecy in the NT? Just because there were pictures in the OT for us in the NT does not do away with the literal interpretation of prophecy.

De 18:22
When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

How hard would it be to tell if prophecies spoken came to pass, if they could be 'spiritually' fulfilled? The partial fulfillment of a prophecy serves as earnest on the prophecy, assuring us that it will indeed come to pass. But if something was spoken by the Lord, it will follow, and it will come to pass.

Premills have always known that Israel would be brought back into their land, otherwise there would be no temple for the antichrist to defile. As to who these people in Israel are, ask their muslim neighbors who they are.

These may very well be symbolic. The bible is full of symbolism. This is no reason to assume that the mark of the beast is symbolic. You are given specific information pertaining to the mark of the beast that would seem to indicate that it is not symbolic. That no man may buy or sell except he have this mark, what kind of spiritual meaning would you gather from this?

I may be totally wrong about the mark, I won't dogmatically say it will be a micro-chip implanted in the folowers of the antichrist. But it sure does fit the bill, and it would explain how it would tie in with finance. But I do know that we have the technology today to literally fulfill the prophecy. We have a nation of Israel in their land, trying to rebuild the temple. We have the falling away of the church going on around us. Jesus Christ is going to return soon, and it is much sooner than it was soon 2000 years ago. My advice to you would be the same advice Jesus had back then.
Matthew 4:17
From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

I'll say it again, just so you know I said it, when the firstfruits gathering comes, you will not be able to say you weren't told. Christians who are not living for their Lord and looking for His coming are going to be left behind. When they get left behind, they will be in the tribulation.

 

Near, at hand, soon, quickly aren't in a parable, they're in Revelation which I thought you took it literal.

Yes, "near" and "at hand" are deep theological terms. Let me guess you don't consider the 1000 year reign to require much study, its pretty plain and simple correct?

It seems those passages that cause problems for your view you write off as being deep and mysterious, the rest just take at face value.

Perhaps you can answer these two simple questions that prophecynut could not:

1.For arguments sake, what if God wished to reveal to John that the events of Revelation were to occur within John's lifetime, perhaps in as little as 4 years, what words would He have used? You cannot use near, quickly, or "at hand" since those obviously don't mean that.

2.When God says something is "not near" in regard to prophecy what does that mean?

You wouldn't like what they say. I'll let you find those treasures on your own. (Hint) you probably won't find them in Dispie writings.

So, according to your view, the jury is still out on whether Jesus and the NT writers were true prophets or just fakes. After all we are still waiting on those prophecies to be fulfilled, right?

You're right. How do we really know the Law is written on our hearts?

Still waiting on scriptural reference for this regathering in unbelief that fulfilled this prophecy. FYI, I do not consider " The Late Great Planet Earth" as scripture.

I guess I will since you seem to have no answer. What happens to your view if there is no Jewish race?

We finally agree, and Revelation is the most symbolic of them all.

First it was a tatoo then a bar code now a micro-chip. The next generation it will be something else.

Any proof? Worse than the church of Corinth in the 1st century? Was the Church created to fail miserably as you seem to believe? I guess God filled people cannot succeed against sin.

Tell me again, what does "at hand" mean?

By the way, the OT teaches that the Kingdom comes during the last days, not the end of the last days.

Would that be the firstfruits of James 1:18 or of Rev 14:4? Or perhaps they are the same???

Wow! I never knew that. Can you provide a scripture that tells us that those who aren't looking for His soon coming will get left behind. What if they are pre-occupied with saving souls and growing the Kingdom that they forget to look up into the clouds every morning, will they be left behind?

 

It's non-Biblical nonsense such as that, Grasshopper, that has led me to totally reject dispensational premillennialism. I may find in my study of preterism that it isn't totally on the mark, but even in my limited study so far I already know that preterism has lots more Bible to back it up than does dispensational premillennialism.

Continue keeping the dispensationalists on their heels, Grasshopper.

 

Ken, belief that some will miss the rapture is not dispensationalism. It is the partial rapture theory. At least try to demonstrate a little bit of knowledge.

Besides, preterism is the laughing stock of Christians. The only way they keep us on our heels is because we double over in laughter and fall backward due to the pain.

 

I hope you won't mind if I investigate preterism for myself rather than simply taking your word for it.

Merry Christmas, Daniel.

 

Have at it.

 

That's a pretty foolish statement. There is some merit in partial preterism. On an intellectual level it makes sense. One would need to be half-blind to not recognize the gaping holes in the party line eschotological viewpoint, IMHO.

Having said that, I'm not a preterist.