Aah, two verses. I guess you point in the first verse is that future tense, obviously meaning that His coming is still future. By the same logic I can quote Isaiah 7:14 and prove that the Virgin will, also in our future, conceive, and bear a son.
I have no problems with your second verse either, although I cannot see your point.
Would Full Preterism be seen as heresy?
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Yeshua1, Apr 12, 2021.
Page 4 of 5
-
asterisktom Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
The events simply haven't yet happened, & you can't show us they have!
If you insist they have:
Who was the beast & his sidekick the false prophet? (Remember, they are individuals as Scripture says they'll be thrown alive into the lake of fire.)
When did the beast enter the temple in Jerusalem & set up his statue? When did the FP make it speak?
When did he issue the mark of the beast & what did it look like?
That's just for STARTERS ! -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
The literal, physical coming of Christ is a fundamental of the faith. The entire evangelical movement, which later split into fundamentalism and New Evangelicalism, held to the fundamentals of the faith. There were a couple of different lists, but they always had the literal, physical coming of Christ. The famous series of books called "The Fundamentals" had three essays that taught this. So yes, full preterism is a denial of a fundamental of the faith. It is also a huge error in Christology; John taught that teachers who erred in Christology were to be avoided (2 John 9-11).
It's very simple to disprove the full preterist idea that the coming of Christ in AD 70 was only spiritual. Thus, it if that coming was not physical, then Christ has not really come yet. asterisktom and I use to tangle on this point, and when I used the Greek to disprove this so-called spiritual coming, he told me I relied too much on the Greek. Funny, I always thought that the NT was written in Greek. Don't know how Tom decided the Greek was not important.
Anyway, rather than belabor the point, I'll simply make one point from the Greek, though I have made many others in the past here on the BB. The word Greek parousia (παρουσία) is used in 24 verses of the NT. It always--ALWAYS--means a physical coming or presence. For examples, see 1 Cor. 15:23, 16:17, 2 Cor. 7:6-7 (twice), Phil. 1:26 & 2:12, etc. It occurs four times in Matt. 24 alone to refer to the 2nd Coming of Christ, but also in 1 Thess. 2:19, 3:13, 4:15, and many other times. Therefore the 2nd Coming of Christ is still future and still physical, since the preterist admits that Christ did not come physically in AD 70.
P. S. asterisktom believes that Christ no longer has a physical body--that somehow the Incarnation has been reversed, though he doesn't say how that stupendous event happened. So when Christ "came" in AD 70 He just came as a spirit. And by the way, "spiritual" in the Bible does not refer to being "a spirit" but speaks of things of and pertaining to the spirit. Where did Christ leave His wonderful resurrection body? Preterists don't know! But "the body without the spirit is dead" (James 2:26). So somewhere in Heaven, perhaps, the dead body of Christ is enshrined like that of Lenin in Moscow? Naw. -
And, did He split the Mt. of Olives in two, leaving a great gulf between the halves ? And that area has been inhabited since when Jesus ascended. If every eye saw Him, how come nobody reported it ? -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Every single prophecy of the Incarnation of Christ, His First Coming, was fulfilled literally. Therefore, it is as obvious as the nose on a Preterist face that all of the prophecies of the 2nd Coming of Christ will be fulfilled literally. And a "spiritual" coming is not one of those.
P. S. I have to add just one more line. The Incarnation was dramatically prophesied in the OT. Where in the world is any prophecy of Jesus losing His body? A de-incarnation if you will? Such a de-incarnation would come under necessary doctrines of Christology (2 John 1:9-11 again). -
-
-
-
-
asterisktom Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
asterisktom Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Any denial of a future' physical, and literal return of Christ is heresy
-
One of the big problems of boldly proclaiming something that is not true is one becomes a prisoner of their mistakes. It takes real guts to move beyond, admit a mistake.
The second problem for some is they are ashamed to embrace the actual words of the Bible. This is an actual teaching of the Bible: "For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father's, and of the holy angels. Luke 9:26 -
The second coming of Jesus, as others have mentioned, will be the epic event of the age, so big and so glorious that every single person living on the planet will see it and the historians will not be able to ignore it.
-
asterisktom Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Jesus is clearly referring to Himself. And He is called Jesus in this very verse. How can it be any clearer? -
asterisktom Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
asterisktom Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Page 4 of 5