Featured Full Preterism: True or False

seems like he holds to the first resurrection being when born again, and the bible states that will happen after death at return of jesus, or to us alive at that time!

Also, why would we celebrate Communion still, fior that is to be done as a memorial until he comes again?

 

That is true, for they see the baptism/communion under old covenant period/era!

Same way Hyper calvinists don't have missionaries, for I am a calvinist, but do NOT discount the great commission as not for today!

back to the op though...

IF Pretierists deny that we also will experience physical resurrection, deny Communion, deny Second Coming, how can that view NOT be heretical?

 

Methinks, "heretical," may be a lot like, "beauty."

In the eyes____

 

Math is our Friend!!!

 

You have just so clearly illustrated Occam's Razor......sort of.

 

problem here is that full pretierism disagrees with Jesus Himself, so comes down to the basic question "qwho do you trust?"

 

I still celebrate communion when I get the chance. There is nothing that stops this observance from being continued. I believe the passage emphasizes the backward aspect (rather, the ongoing aspect) more than the eschatological, "in remembrance of Me" being mentioned twice.

1Co 11:24-26
And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

The until He comes part does not say explicitly that the observance ends at the Parousia; it just describes a feature of the Lord's Supper for the church - and to outsiders - a proclaiming of the Gospel message in symbols. It is a means for getting ready for that Parousia.

In the same way, we have the promise of Christ to His disciples (Matthew 28) that He would be with them until the end of the age. Whether you see this age's end to be in the first century (as I do), or some future time to come (as most here do), still, I think we can agree that the age spoken of here has an end. And yet we believe that Christ will not stop being with us. We believe that He will be with us forever, far beyond the end of all finite ages.

I would say that duration of the Lord's Supper should be understood the same way.

 

I believe that, in your zeal to get to to the crux (as you see it) you make hasty comments. Are you really sure about your last statement? And to call it "false" (with all that word implies)? Are you thus lumping scholars like Hodge with the JWs? He certainly (to name one of many) believed in spiritual resurrection as well as physical. A quick check found also writings by Ryle and Vos along the same lines.

I must say I was surprised that you had written that.

 

Most definitely.

This argument is only against those who deny a physical resurrection of Christ, like JWs - not preterists.

I agree to everything up to your last two sentences. The base you established is for a physical resurrection of Christ, not that there is not also, in Scripture, reference to spiritual resurrection.

See, this is where you are adding to your careful work things that are explicitly given in Scripture. He shall come in like manner (manner is the emphasis, not essence).

In what manner did the disciples last see Jesus? A
cloud took Him out of their sight. He was invisible. And that is how He was to return.

I want to answer a few other posts before I answer yours in more detail, probably after I return from work.

I appreciate your having verses here that we can work with.

 

I already answered the first part of your post. But, to be clear, yes, I do deny that Christ exists now in a physical body, whether glorified or not.

To me it is both unscriptural and a conceptual monstrosity that one third of the ineffable Godhead should be physical, the other Persons being "only" spiritual".

The Son's taking human form was a mission-constrained necessity, not an improvement over the perfection He already had from eternity past. He went "slumming" down to our world to rescue us. There is no need for Him to continue under the constraints of eternal physicality, whether glorified or not.

 

I am not sure what I had written that could have been construed in such a manner. Maybe you can find my actual comments. I do believe in the resurrection of the dead at the coming (that is the Parousia) at AD70. That was the general resurrection. Everyone since then, though they are still saved though faith in Christ, are enjoying the benefits of the "age to come".

Unfortunately, this is all I have time for before work.

 

In my study of the resurrection I have come to the conclusion that the resurrection can refer only to the body. That is what makes the J.W. position so ridiculous. It is a non-resurrection.

Here is the definition of death:
James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
--The spirit is separated from the body at death. It either goes to heaven or hell. Is the term "resurrection" ever applied to this situation? Not that I know of. It only applies to the body. This is why we are able to attack the RCC doctrine of Mariolatry effectively. Mary is dead. She is still in the grave, along with everyone else who has died. We don't pray to the dead. Mary, along with all the apostles, and other saints of God that have died, are awaiting a physical resurrection, where their bodies will be raised from the dust of this earth. Their spirits may already be in heaven. But someday they will be united together again as one person.

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
--Some of those that John wrote to probably saw the resurrected Lord. Now they were waiting for him to come again. When he would appear the second time they would see him, and they too would be changed in their physical appearance. They would receive glorified bodies as Christ has. They would see Christ and would be like him. They would see him as he is. They would be like him as he is.

This is one of Paul's greatest arguments:
1 Corinthians 15:13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
--In verse 13 he speaks of the resurrection of the dead in general--our physical resurrection which is yet to come. Christ was the first one, and is the only one to have risen from the dead. If there is no "resurrection" then our preaching is vain; our faith is vain; and we are found false witnesses. What an indictment!!

1 Corinthians 15:16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
--The conclusion of that passage. If there is no physical resurrection to look forward to, then Christ himself is not raised. There is a resurrection. Inasmuch as Christ is raised from the dead it is a sure thing that we also will be raised from the dead.

1 Corinthians 15:19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
--If there is no physical resurrection then we of all people are most miserable. What have we to look forward to?
There is a kingdom coming. Then after that: a new earth and a new heaven. These are not to be inhabited just by spirits.

1 Corinthians 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
--There is an order to everything.
First Christ was physically raised from the dead.
Then we will follow in that same kind of resurrection. We will be raised "at his coming."

Paul goes on from verse 49ff to describe the nature of our body, what type it will be. The word "resurrection" always refers to the resurrection of the body. No other religion claims to have a resurrected prophet. They know the word refers to the body. Muslims cannot claim that Mohammed arose from the dead. He didn't. His body is in the grave. "Resurrection" applies only to the body.

 

Does it not say in scripture that the SOUL that sinneth IT shall die ?
not only did the body die but the SOUL also in Hell(grave)
I believe the DEATH passed from adam was SOUL DEATH by sin.
Psalm 6-5:For in DEATH there is NO remembrance of thee(God):in the GRAVE who shall give thee thanks?
Psalm 16-10:For thou(God) wilt not leave my SOUL in Hell(grave)neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
The SOUL was DEAD in the GRAVE

 

Why do you keep bringing up the JWs?

 

OK. BTW, I forgot to thank you for kind words earlier. I appreciate it.

Now I really do have to go. Those Chinese students won't teach themselves.

Hmm... actually they will. I have never seen such motivated students.

 

Maybe they will teach themselves this.

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. Ezek 18:20
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. Isa 53:6
because he hath poured out his soul unto death: Isa 53:12
For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; (Sheol) neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Psalms 16:10
He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of the Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, (Hades, Sheol) neither his flesh did see corruption.

Will be the only way they will learn it. NO?

 

Thanks for clearing that up for me.