A Death Blow to Full (Hyper) Preterism

Since I have had no Greek I will not push this point. however I will note that men much more studied than you and I combined have referred to the parousia of Matthew 24 as a non physical event. Men such as Gill, Barnes, Lightfoot, Clarke, Sproul , Henry and many others who are not full preterist see it as a non physical coming of Christ.

 

Where have I displayed arrogance? Is firmly believing on ones position and debating it a sign of arrogance? But since you are upset I will address you in the same manner you did me.

1. It's hard to take serious one you puts the definitions with the wrong words.

2. It looks as if you looked at the notes in your Scofield Bible to come up with your defense.

3. Genos would have been a better word for race, not genea.

4. I'm not sure Dispies even hold to the "race" interpretation anymore. Your defense was so entry level I didn't see it worth my time. Especially since I have obtained an IPad, much harder to respond on these forums.

5. What does Scofield say about Rev. 1:3; 22:7; 22:10?

6. Is this arrogant enough for you?

 

I get tired of the arrogance accusation too, which has happened to me here on a number of occasions. After spending so many years in a system with so many loose ends it was so refreshing to find something that fits so perfectly. What looks like arrogance on the outside is actually, in my case, and I assume yours, relief.

BTW, I have a number of loose threads to attend to but haven' been feeling well, plus we are getting ready to move still. But in the meantime I have enjoyed the input from others here, esp. yours, Logos, KyRedneck, J.D. et al. And also a few others who, though differing in views, at least do so graciously.

 

Everyone that you just quoted is a Calvinist. Some of them to the point of taking their Calvinism to such an extreme that it becomes heretical. Let me give you an example:

http://www.reformedreader.org/history/vedder/ch16.htm

Our famed John Gill, Baptist theologian; his theology led to both fatalism and antinomianism claims the reputed Baptist historian, Vedder, in his "Short History of the Baptists." There was no need for the Great Commission. God would save whomever he would save. He didn't need man's help or interference--"an impertinent interference with the prerogatives of God."
I would call that heresy. I have great respect for him as a theologian and do not hesitate to use his books. But I am careful how I use them. The same holds true for some of the other Calvinists that you mentioned, especially from the same time period as Gill.

 

They rose at his coming in 70 AD and are now in heaven.

Those who remain will not go to sheol upon death they will go immediately to heaven upon death. In the twinkling of an eye so to speak. They aren't changed on earth, but at the time of their death. Notice the verse (17) says after that

 

But what about our physical body? What happens to our physical body after we die? Does it not come out? Does it "rot away" in the grave? Please elaborate!! I honestly want to know your beliefs!! Thanks in advance!!

:thumbs::thumbs::wavey:

Willis

 

Allan when you look in the past mirror of Preterism it reflects your future destiny

Greetings Allan,

At first I was going to thank you for illustrating the difference between how preterists build their case on the bible and how futurists build theirs on such things as historical writer’s mistaken beliefs down through the ages and the Creeds, but I think you are totally sincere in your beliefs just like I was when I was a premil dispy and instead feel compelled just to say if you are only seeking truth and not merely seeking to defend a position at all costs then I am your future.

It won’t be an easy journey at times, but if you let the truth of the bible furrow its message into your heart inevitability you will let go of beliefs that aren’t even in the bible and embrace Preterism.

One example, you stated a literal, single antichrist. This is a common belief among futurists that most people assume is presented in the bible who is a future world leader. Most would be surprised to find out the term is never presented as such in the bible. The term antichrist only appears in 1st and 2nd John and is never a world leader, but apostate Christians, non-believers in the resurrection, etc.

If you read the passage around it for context you can clearly see in every example that there is never one single antichrist, but multiple antichrists. Perhaps the truth about the term is not as much fun as the myth and it is difficult for people to let go of an erroneous belief.

And, yes the Apostles did tell people to look for his return and since all the N.T. was written before 70AD they never said he had already returned—they understand exactly what they are doing—they are divinely inspired and the Holy Ghost gave them true understanding. Paul did tell the Thessalonians (1 Thel 4:15) We who are still alive at the Lord’s coming…clearly any honest reading can’t deny he is saying to them the Lord will come in their generation.

Thank God I was lead by the Spirit to full Preterism and subjected my views to the truth. Allan you will find reading the bible both OT and NT come alive for you like never before, the contradictions are untangled, and there is harmony to the Scriptures that you can hold dear to instead of struggling and having to fudge a little to get it to reconcile itself.

And, if you don’t believe me just test it out for yourself and see what happens. Just be prepared to be convicted by the truth and not have peace till you reconcile with it.

 

Yes, you said rightly, that you were "Led by the Spirit". The bible is clear that we can be led "By the Spirit", "Into temptation" (The unread say "No"). Yes, Jesus say "Lead us NOT into temptation", is that the opposite of what happened to Him "He was lead by the Spirit INTO TEMPTATION".

I'm starting to agree that synergism is heresy, that is I was a heretic, forgiven, and now in the truth, how can people, or myself miss these truths?

[edit - personal attacks are not permitted].

This is a discusting site, the only reason I'm here is because my friend asked me to.

[edit - personal attacks are not permitted]

 

Yea, the "White Men", is the most important part. Has anyone on this forum [edit - personal attacks are not permitted]?

 

Calv1,

Do you realize nothing you said (your unsolicited rant) has to do with the subject at hand? It seems very odd that you are speaking this way out of the blue. I am sincere in asking: "Are you alright?"

 

Hi! Thanks for your concern, but it's a "Rant" only to you. I was admiring the rare truth I see on this forum. Truth is a rare thing here, it's mainly emotional tradition without scripture, but thanks for looking out for me!

 

You want truth; I’ll give it to you straight on: I suspect you [Edited - Personal comments are not permitted, however accurate they may be]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandiosity

I doubt you will be here long but I wish you well and hope you seek some help in this area.

Good Night.

 

Thanks for your "Accusations", but I already have a "Accuser"

 

And what good fruit and/or contribution to the thread does this remark bring? If you have something of worth to say, then post it; if not it is better to keep your mouth shut lest you put your foot in it and further embarrass yourself.

 

My position or understanding on this has never changed

Sorry I missed seeing this earlier.

My view on this subject hasn’t change a single bit since what I was taught as a kid in a totally premil dispy church.

Yes of course the physical body just stays there and rots away into nothingness. Personally I’ve never been taught or believed any thing else.

All this hubado over the physical body being resurrected was new and strange to me when I came on this board.

What I had always been taught and believed fit right in with being a total Preterist. I don’t see this as a view particular to Preterists.

Why would you care or even want a physical body with its aches and pains. The glorified spiritual body is a vast improvement.

It also fits right in with scripture. Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven. 1 Corinthians 15:50.

Some people want to cling to a notion of a risen physical body in heaven because Christ has a risen physical body while he was on earth. It seems plain to me that he had a physical body while on earth and a spiritual body in heaven.

Christ had unfinished business to attend to while on earth and took physical form to attend to it. We are not gods and have no work left on earth so we won’t need a physical body.

If I was taught this as a kid in a Southern Baptist church it makes me think all this hubado about getting back a physical body is a recent phenomenon that took hold in recent years.

 

Is this amusing or just strange

Calv

I would respond to this, but there is nothing here except some circular references to spirit and temptation and not wanting to be here. No biblical references nor even those ethereal references to creeds and early believers.

You’ve got to give me something to work with Calv.

If you didn’t want to be here why stick around? Does your friend run your life or you?

 

Clarke was not a Calvinist. If those who wrote in the 17th and 18th century are unreliable then why would you point to Church Fathers who preceded them by 1500 years:

All the early Christian writers who touched on the subject without fail wrote of a literal 2nd coming of Christ.

So we can't trust John Gill because he didn't have the books you do but we can trust those who preceded him by hundreds of years?

Since you don't like old, or white or Calvinists, Then here you go: http://www.allthingsfulfilled.com/

To hopefully wrap up my thoughts, my disagreement is not necessarily that Christ will return physically it is that I must believe that based on your opening post. If I was to be convinced of a physical second coming it would come from scriptures such as Acts 1, not because He came physically the first time. I find no strength in that argument.

Secondly scholars from all stripes and from every age acknowledge that the coming in the Olivet Discourse and other passages point not to a physical bodily return but to a coming in judgment.

Thirdly I am curious as to your belief that Christ threatened to return physically to the church of Sardis. Was that an idle threat? Would that have been the second coming? How would that have affected the other Churches throughout Asia?