What led me to preterism....

[Winman]

Winman,
Thanks for the opportunity to show why Preterists misinterpret Matt.16:28.

Jesus was not teaching that "some would not die until after 6 to 8 days"!
He seems to say "some would die after He comes to reward all believers"!!
Mark places the time to die "after they see Him coming in Kingdom Power!!!

Peter saw in the Transfiguration experience the "MAJESTY" of Christ's future
coming in Kingdom Power (as later revealed to John in Rev.12:10-11) where
many will die before He actually appears in both Power and in His Glory!
Matthew reveals "some will die as He is ABOUT (mello) to come in GLORY!!
Mark reveals "some will die after He comes in POWER"; not yet in His Glory!!!

Great because Peter includes both "Power and PRESENCE" at His SC!
The Transfiguration envisioned His SC as fulfillment of Endtime Prophecy!!
"Some must taste death" after He has come in Power thru the two Prophets!!!

Preterists "speculate" by claiming Christ came before "some here" had died!
The "NOW of God's Kingdom Power" coincides with the 3.5 Endtime Period!!
Jesus was preparing "some" to anticipate death during the final 3.5 days!!!

Rev.12:10-14 explains why Mark 9:1 should have been Mark 8:38!
Robert Stephanus, in 1550, didn't make connection with Revelation!!
He separated Mark 9:1 from what had occurred about 6 days before!!!
Mel

Lastday (Mel)

Thanks for that answer. There are several prophesies which seem to have more than one fulfillment. I agree with you that Jesus coming in power in his kingdom is future. But I also believe that this prophesy was also fulfilled on the mount of transfiguration, or it was a figure.

And I also believe the "great persecution" under Saul (Paul) in Acts 8-9 was a figure of a future persecution of the Jews that will be saved when Jesus comes in the future.

There seems to be quite a few prophesies that have a double fulfillment like this.

 

[HankD]

What is the Greek word for "positionally"? There is none. But there is an equivalent term: "spiritually". We are spiritually seated in the heavenlies.

I am not sure, but I suspect that much is made today of positional truth because of doctrinal discomfort with the ramifications of using the word "spiritual". It has become a dirty word for some: spiritual -> spiritualize -> allegorize -> disbelief.

And yet the main emphasis in the Bible is on spiritual reality.
The kingdom is spiritual, not physical.
The resurrection of believers (Note: I am writing of believers) is spiritual, not physical. This makes it even more real than if it was merely physical. When Christ said:

"I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die." (John 11:25-26)

He was emphasizing our spiritual nature, and the spiritual nature of our new life in Him. In a very real sense we will never die. We will only sleep. The disciples misunderstood this very point in this chapter.

When it says we will be like Him it does not mean in all particulars. The passage itself, that you allude to here, provides the answer.

Your memory is correct. I say it because the Bible says it. 1 Cor. 15:50

"Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption."

You believe this too, right?

Yes.

OK then I am spiritually seated in the heavens with Christ.
However I am more than spiritual, I have a body.

My spirit at the moment is seated in the heavenlies but my resurrected body some day also as well.

But because of what you say, I have come to the realization that you in all probablity don't believe that there is to be a bodily (flesh and bone) resurrection such as Christ experienced for those who believe on Him.

Perhaps I am wrong, but... (just in case)

Luke 24

37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.
38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?
39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.
41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?
42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.
43 And he took it, and did eat before them.​

BTW, Luke under inspiration also wrote the book of Acts in which he gives the account of Jesus in this flesh and bone body going up through the atmosphere to heaven with a promise of a return in "like manner".

Acts 1

6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
11 Which 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.​

This same Jesus - not Titus.
Will come from heaven - not Rome.​

So, this same Jesus of flesh and bone (not flesh and blood but flesh and bone made alive by the Spirit and not oxygenated blood) went on up through the atmosphere into heaven awaiting the "times of the Gentiles to be fullfilled" and then shall return in this same flesh and bone body (to the same place BTW, the Mount of Olives).

Back to the resurrection:

This same Jesus of flesh and bone whom John, (one of the apostles who handled Him when He appeared to them in the Luke 24 account) says the following;​

1 John 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;​

ALSO says:​

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.​

And Paul:​

Romans 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:​

1 Corinthians 15
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.​

I therefore expect to have a glorified resurrected flesh and bone body just as He has while I await His return in His glorified resurrected flesh and bone body.​

We shall be more than just spirit beings, we shall be like Him...

39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.​

HankD​

 

[lastday]

Winman,
I had a feeling we would agree. Misinterpretation of Matt.16:28
is an alledged prop for Preterism. The main reason I cannot keep
up with them is their total submission to a figurative approach to
the entire realm of prophecy which could not have been fulfilled.
BTW, please note that prophecy is a noun and prophesy a verb.
Mel

 

[Winman]

Winman,
I had a feeling we would agree. Misinterpretation of Matt.16:28
is an alledged prop for Preterism. The main reason I cannot keep
up with them is their total submission to a figurative approach to
the entire realm of prophecy which could not have been fulfilled.
BTW, please note that prophecy is a noun and prophesy a verb.
Mel

Thanks for that spelling tip!

Yes, Preterism relies heavily upon spiritualizing the scriptures. They also lean heavily on the writings of men like Josephus.

I answered Asterisktom immediately, he said he would gladly answer the verses I presented in Job. Must be digging out his favorite Preterist authors right now to see how they explain these verses away.

But usually he just ignores questions he can't answer. I've asked him about these verses before, he never answered. He'll be back after my question is buried under new posts.

 

[asterisktom]

Thanks for that spelling tip!

Yes, Preterism relies heavily upon spiritualizing the scriptures. They also lean heavily on the writings of men like Josephus.

I answered Asterisktom immediately, he said he would gladly answer the verses I presented in Job. Must be digging out his favorite Preterist authors right now to see how they explain these verses away.

But usually he just ignores questions he can't answer. I've asked him about these verses before, he never answered. He'll be back after my question is buried under new posts.

No, Winman, I don't really have any favorite Preterist authors. I have been having problems with my ISP, so you'll just have to wait.

Not everyone just lives right at the computer.

 

[asterisktom]

Bizarre, bloodless, resurrected Jesus

Jesus did not have blood when he resurrected, he spilled his blood out and offered it in heaven to pay for our sins. But after he resurrected he told the disciples that he was not a spirit, but flesh and bone and ate food in front of them.

Wow.

Um... flesh requires blood. The very act of eating - unless Jesus was just pretending to eat - requires blood.

But surely I am misreading you. Otherwise you believe in a Jesus that is similar to that of the Docetist, a Jesus who only seemed to be a resurrected normal human.

 

[asterisktom]

Yes, Preterism relies heavily upon spiritualizing the scriptures. They also lean heavily on the writings of men like Josephus.

Josephus is a good writer. Of course, he has his share of errors. It shows that you don't really know much about preterism when you say we lean heavily on him.

I lean heavily on the Bible.

My connection cuts out without warning. Instead of losing long post I will just write short ones for now.

 

[asterisktom]

Yes.

OK then I am spiritually seated in the heavens with Christ.
However I am more than spiritual, I have a body.

My spirit at the moment is seated in the heavenlies but my resurrected body some day also as well.

But because of what you say, I have come to the realization that you in all probablity don't believe that there is to be a bodily (flesh and bone) resurrection such as Christ experienced for those who believe on Him.

See, this is why I wonder why I bother. How often have I wrote on this board about Preterism and still people write such things as you just did.

Maybe if I put it in ALLCAPS:
CHRIST RESURRECTED WITH FLESH AND BONES.

So all of your verses are a waste of typing, proving what I am not denying.

And, though you are spiritually seated in the heavenlies, you expected to get your flesh up there too. Do you believe, then, that there will be a time when I cor. 15:50 will no longer be true, when God will change His mind and say "Flesh and blood now can enter in."?

 

[asterisktom]

This verse says flesh AND blood. Jesus did not have blood when he resurrected, he spilled his blood out and offered it in heaven to pay for our sins. But after he resurrected he told the disciples that he was not a spirit, but flesh and bone and ate food in front of them.

One last observation before I move on to Job: If I had written the above - and not you, Winman, I suspect your bud Lastday would have been on me like white on rice.

In order to safeguard a cherished doctrine you make a greater error concerning the very nature of Christ.

Ok. Now I need to crack open those Preterists tomes.....

 

[Winman]

Wow.

Um... flesh requires blood. The very act of eating - unless Jesus was just pretending to eat - requires blood.

But surely I am misreading you. Otherwise you believe in a Jesus that is similar to that of the Docetist, a Jesus who only seemed to be a resurrected normal human.

I guess it never occured to you that the resurrection body is not exactly like the mortal body. Our present bodies are corrupt and mortal, our resurrection bodies shall be incorruptable and immortal.

Jesus very carefully pointed out to his disciples that he was flesh and bone, not mentioning blood, and he ate before them.

Or maybe you forgot that they pierced Jesus side and his blood flowed out.

 

[asterisktom]

I guess it never occured to you that the resurrection body is not exactly like the mortal body. Our present bodies are corrupt and mortal, our resurrection bodies shall be incorruptable and immortal.

Jesus very carefully pointed out to his disciples that he was flesh and bone, not mentioning blood, and he ate before them.

Or maybe you forgot that they pierced Jesus side and his blood flowed out.

Every single blood cell poured out? That is bizarre and unnecessary.

Well, I take that back. Necessary for your bloodless Jesus.

Yes, the resurrection body of Christ was different. But normal enough to have fooled the two in Emmaus. They took him at first for a normal flesh-and-blood man. That would have required flesh, which would have required blood. I can't believe I have to even go this length, but:
1. Eating requires blood.
2.Walking to Emmaus requires blood.
3. Either Jesus was bloodless and pasty white - and the Emmaus disciples just didn't notice , or
4. Jesus "put on an appearance" (like in the Docetist heresy of the 2nd century) of normal (with blood) flesh.

You are typing yourself into a corner.

 

[FR7 Baptist]

I guess it never occured to you that the resurrection body is not exactly like the mortal body. Our present bodies are corrupt and mortal, our resurrection bodies shall be incorruptable and immortal.

It is true that our bodies will be changed by the power of God at the resurrection.

Jesus very carefully pointed out to his disciples that he was flesh and bone, not mentioning blood, and he ate before them.

Or maybe you forgot that they pierced Jesus side and his blood flowed out.

The "flesh and bone" comment is clearly a rhetorical device in reference to His resurrection. That doesn't mean he had no blood.

 

[Logos1]

We have much agreement here!

Sometimes it is good to study other belief systems using the teachings of those who believe that way, not just the critics of the system.

Thomas that is great advice and I agree completely. I wish everybody would take it to heart. I know I sure did years ago. I use to be the biggest premil dispy east of the Mississippi River. Of course like most people once I found out how Darby created dispensationalism in the 1800s I could no longer buy into it. I studied the 4 basic models and became an Amill for a short time. When I first heard of Preterism I thought it was just as crazy as any person in here (even lastdays), but as I studied Preterism more and more all the confusing pieces of the bible began to fall in place and all the formerly hard to understand scriptures about prophecy became crystal clear.

Once I realized the Apostles taught and believed Christ would return in their generation and they were the ones inspired by the Holy Spirit then it became obviously that Preterism was the only way to go. I don’t understand how people can think they are more inspired than the Holy Spirit.

Once I learned to view prophecy through the Preterist model all the prophecy and other scriptures harmonized and made sense like never before.

I should say that I enjoy the dispensational pundits who regal me with those exciting stories of a rapture, antichrist, battle of Armageddon, millennial reign, etc, but I don’t believe a word of it I just find it very entertaining. A biblical Grimm’s Fairy Tale if you will. I search out these latter day biblical yarn spinner’s where ever they can be found.

Prophecy becomes simplified by many degrees when you realize that there is no provision in the bible for the Old Covenant to end and then be restarted. There is no teaching down those lines from Christ, the Apostles, or anyone else. Once 70 AD brings down the curtain on the Old Covenant it’s just gone and along with it every last prophecy based around it.

If more people would just seek the truth with an open mind to what the bible says and an open heart to where the Holy Spirit leads we would all soon be full Preterists.

“Your understanding of the inspiration of Scripture is utterly astounding!” Mel

Why thank you Mel!

 

[asterisktom]

So how do you explain Job's statements?

Job 19:25 For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:
26 And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:
27 Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.

Job said at the latter day his redeemer (Jesus) shall stand upon the earth. I must have missed this, could you tell me where Jesus is standing upon the earth now? And just how does a spirit stand upon the earth?

And Job said though worms destroy his body (decomposition), yet in his "flesh" shall he see God.

How do you explain these verses?

First of all, your translation states details more definitely than is really warranted from the text. A good translation would have helped you here, at least as far as some of these difficulties are concerned.

There are no "worms" in the text. The KJV's italics for the words show that they felt it was implied. The NKJV does a better job, as far as I can see.

25 For I know that my Redeemer lives,
And He shall stand at last on the earth;

26 And after my skin is destroyed, this I know,
That in my flesh I shall see God,

27 Whom I shall see for myself,
And my eyes shall behold, and not another.
How my heart yearns within me!

Questions come to mind as to who are the destroyers of verse 26. Some commentaries say that these could even be Job's miserable comforters. Neither do we have to insist that the end times are what we modern Christians think by that term. That term is not at all used that way in the OT.

The phrase "in my flesh" can also be translated "from my flesh" (as in "outside of my flesh"). The sense then would be, "Even though I am no longer in the flesh I will still see God."

If you look at a variety of commentaries - I mean scholarly ones from different centuries - you will find that there is a wide range of interpretation of this passages. So, then, why would you want to use this passage to help flesh out (no pun intended) your exposition of the much clearer and unequivocal 1 Cor. 15:50?

 

[asterisktom]

I sent that first part up because I thought my connection would falter - again.

The best way to understand any problem passage in the Bible is to look within the same book first and see if we can't find helpful clues. And, sure enough, we do have such help in Job.

Having studied this out some more I believe that the Redeemer that Job was talking about and the meeting and seeing God is found in this very book. Job 42:5:

5 “I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear,
But now my eye sees You."

Job states in 19:26 his confidence that things will turn out right in the end, that he will "see God". This is exactly what happened here at the end of the book.

I am not saying that there are not New Testament themes glimpsed dimly. But I am saying that it is unwise for us to strictly pour New Testament details - post New Testament, in fact - into an obscure passage such as this.

 

[HankD]

See, this is why I wonder why I bother. How often have I wrote on this board about Preterism and still people write such things as you just did.

Maybe if I put it in ALLCAPS:
CHRIST RESURRECTED WITH FLESH AND BONES.

So all of your verses are a waste of typing, proving what I am not denying.

And, though you are spiritually seated in the heavenlies, you expected to get your flesh up there too. Do you believe, then, that there will be a time when I cor. 15:50 will no longer be true, when God will change His mind and say "Flesh and blood now can enter in."?

I know you have already said that Christ was resurrected in a flesh and bones body, you must be thinking of someone else.
However, we are talking about our resurrected bodies as well.

We wont be flesh and blood but we will have a body like His a glorified resurrected body of flesh and bones.

Christ has been made alive by the Spirit of God and although He doesn't need food, He can eat food if He desires to do so as He did after His resurrection with the apostles and so shall I as He has promised that "we shall be like Him" when He appears.

1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:​

Both John and Paul confirmed the resurrection of our bodies (believers) under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Yes, for mortals eating food requires blood but I think our Father in Heaven can figure out for us how to make glorified and resurrected bodies that can eat food and consume/assimilate it without blood as He did for His Son and He will make that provision for us as well as He promised His apostles.

Luke 22

28 Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations.
29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;
30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.​

No matter what our view, here we have the apostles being promised to be able to eat and drink at Christ's table in the Kingdom of God. Not only that but they will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

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.​

HankD

 

[J.D.]

Based on your understanding of sin then you must believe that the Lord sinned. Matt 10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

It is a sin to drive brothers apart unnecessarily. I think you know that's what I meant. "These six [things] doth the LORD hate: yea, seven [are] an abomination unto him:...he that soweth discord among brethren."(Prov 6:16,19).

Love does not mean that an offender is allowed to continue and perhaps harm the faith of another or a group.

Is an "offender" someone that holds a different opinion on a non-essential matter, or someone that disturbs the fellowship with there opinion?

Any error in clear doctrine needs to be confronted with scripture out of love. If the person listens and repents then you have won a brother. If they do not then they would need to be put out.

The Bible clearly forbids "puttting out" or even disputing with someone in the Church over doubtful things. (Rom 14:1)

There are many people and churches like yourself that welcome false teaching so the ousted person could easily find some place to attend.

1) I do not welcome false teaching. 2) It seems to me that it's not that easy to find a church that practices biblical discipline in essential matters and biblical charity in matters of conscience.

Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?
The answer is no. So they one holding the false teaching would need to be put out if they would not repent.

Right. Israel and God could not walk together. Why? "For they know not to do right, saith the LORD, who store up violence and robbery in their palaces." (Amos 3:10) It had nothing to do with an eschatological dispute. (by the way, the Jews were futurists, and they are still futurists today, even though their messiah has already come).

 

[asterisktom]

I know you have already said that Christ was resurrected in a flesh and bones body, you must be thinking of someone else.
However, we are talking about our resurrected bodies as well.

We wont be flesh and blood but we will have a body like His a glorified resurrected body of flesh and bones.
...

HankD

No, I was thinking of you, seeing that you had all those verses on the resurrected Christ.

Your belief is apparently very similar to Winman's, belief in a flesh-and-bones resurrection body has its own set of serious problems. Please see my posts to Winman on this. Posts 86 and 91.

 

[asterisktom]

No matter what our view, here we have the apostles being promised to be able to eat and drink at Christ's table in the Kingdom of God. Not only that but they will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

...

HankD

My view apparently wasn't even considered here. This is metaphorical language, of which the Bible is full.

Or do you believe that all of believing Israel will be enjoying eternal life under the shade of their own personal vine and fig tree?

Or do you believe that Satan was bound with a literal chain?

I could go on and on.

 

[HankD]

No, I was thinking of you, seeing that you had all those verses on the resurrected Christ.

Your belief is apparently very similar to Winman's, belief in a flesh-and-bones resurrection body has its own set of serious problems. Please see my posts to Winman on this. Posts 86 and 91.

I needed to go over them again because I wanted to show that we would "be like Him" when He appears.

HankD