The Origin & destiny of believers as taught in 1 Cor. 15.

[asterisktom]

This post below is excerpted and adapted from my most recent Xanga article, Preterist Response to a Futurist. I post it here, with a few modifications, to focus on one aspect of this resurrection question: Just what will we be like?

In this 15th chapter of First Corinthians we have a series of contrasts between the new life and the old, the things we will become contrasted to those things we are being saved from. Those good qualities of the new creature (v. 42-44) are: incorruption, glory, power, spiritual. Then we read about the originators of the two classes, Adam and Christ. Adam "became a living being". Christ, "a life-giving Spirit." KJV unhelpfully provides "became", which is not at all the point.

Then we come to a very important, oft-overlooked, detail. Overlooked in application, the origins of these two persons. (Skipping v. 46 for this post):

"The first man is of the earth (ἐκ γῆς), earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven (ἐξ οὐρανοῦ) ."

This passage is a continuation of verse 40: somata epigeia and somata epourania now become "ek ges" and "ex ouranou". This preposition (ek, ex - the forms only differ because of euphonics) shows origin. Adam came from the earth, from the dust. This brings to mind the very passage from Genesis. The "Second Adam" came from heaven. Note: In both cases, the origins determine the essence of who these two are - and (v. 48) the essence of their "followers".

Verse 49 says that "we shall [or "let us"] bear the image of the heavenly man" (the Second Adam, from heaven).

Now here is the Preterist application:

We shall be like Christ.
And what is Christ like - according to this passage? He is like He was when He came to Earth. He is spiritual.
Was Christ fleshly before he came here to Earth? No. He was pure Spirit.
We - according to this passage - will also be like Him.
Pure spirit.

We cannot have part Adam's essence ("dust") and part Christ's, seeing that we could not then "enter into the Kingdom of God". "Dust" has to do with "flesh and blood", not spirit.

 

[JesusFan]

This post below is excerpted and adapted from my most recent Xanga article, Preterist Response to a Futurist. I post it here, with a few modifications, to focus on one aspect of this resurrection question: Just what will we be like?

In this 15th chapter of First Corinthians we have a series of contrasts between the new life and the old, the things we will become contrasted to those things we are being saved from. Those good qualities of the new creature (v. 42-44) are: incorruption, glory, power, spiritual. Then we read about the originators of the two classes, Adam and Christ. Adam "became a living being". Christ, "a life-giving Spirit." KJV unhelpfully provides "became", which is not at all the point.

Then we come to a very important, oft-overlooked, detail. Overlooked in application, the origins of these two persons. (Skipping v. 46 for this post):

"The first man is of the earth (ἐκ γῆς), earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven (ἐξ οὐρανοῦ) ."

This passage is a continuation of verse 40: somata epigeia and somata epourania now become "ek ges" and "ex ouranou". This preposition (ek, ex - the forms only differ because of euphonics) shows origin. Adam came from the earth, from the dust. This brings to mind the very passage from Genesis. The "Second Adam" came from heaven. Note: In both cases, the origins determine the essence of who these two are - and (v. 48) the essence of their "followers".

Verse 49 says that "we shall [or "let us"] bear the image of the heavenly man" (the Second Adam, from heaven).

Now here is the Preterist application:

We shall be like Christ.
And what is Christ like - according to this passage? He is like He was when He came to Earth. He is spiritual.
Was Christ fleshly before he came here to Earth? No. He was pure Spirit.
We - according to this passage - will also be like Him.
Pure spirit.

We cannot have part Adam's essence ("dust") and part Christ's, seeing that we could not then "enter into the Kingdom of God". "Dust" has to do with "flesh and blood", not spirit.

jesus came in human flesh, was raised in same flesh, said was still flesh and blood...

Still in heaven in same form....

Even took his blood back with Himself to apply to the Heavenly temple!

Sounds a lot like some ole JW theology going here!

 

[OldRegular]

What happened to all those Saints in 70 AD???

The HHP's claim that the following passage was fulfilled in 70 AD:

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, KJV
13. But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
14. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
15. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16* For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17. Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
18. Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Now of course the HHP's apparently claim that the shout and trumpet were silent? but never mind that. The questions are:

1. If a bodily resurrection took place here what happened to all those Saints who were resurrected?

2. What about those who were alive and caught up in the air?

 

[OldRegular]

God through the Apostle Paul tells us:

1 Corinthians 15:3-8, KJV
3. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4. And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
5. And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
6. After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
7. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
8. And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

Now what did Peter, the disciples, the five hundred, the Apostles, and Paul see?

I believe that Jesus Christ is the first and only bodily resurrection to date. I believe that His resurrection is the only one mentioned in the Bible until that general one at the end of time. The Bible does record people being brought to life again but these all died!

When Jesus Christ came out of the grave there was a material form. I do not believe that it was identical in all aspects as the body placed in the tomb. Jesus Christ passed through walls yet ate food. Yet a material form was seen as indicated above.

Are you insisting that pure spirit can be seen?

If nothing came out of the tomb why was the stone rolled away? Who or what did the women see?

 

[Amy.G]

Isn't this what the Gnostics taught that Paul condemns as false doctrine?

 

[preacher4truth]

Isn't this what the Gnostics taught that Paul condemns as false doctrine?

Yes. The Neo-gnostics are here.

 

[Amy.G]

Yes. The Neo-gnostics are here.

I'm surprised these guys haven't been banned. This is outright heresy.

 

[JesusFan]

I'm surprised these guys haven't been banned. This is outright heresy.

Always has been condemned by the Christian Church, as it denied the literal Second Coming of jesus, and that there will be a bodily resurrection from the dead!

 

[asterisktom]

God through the Apostle Paul tells us:


Are you insisting that pure spirit can be seen?

If nothing came out of the tomb why was the stone rolled away? Who or what did the women see?

It is like you are actually determined to read my posts totally wrong.

No, Christ did not raise from the dead as "pure spirit". He had a visible, touchable body.

You know what? It just dawned on me that no matter what I write you will still respond in this willfully uncharitable way. Rather than get further into an argument with a Christian brother (though you don't see me that way) I am going to quit responding to you on this thread. I really don't want to just argue. These are wonderful and encouraging topics, but I want to discuss therm scripturally, not fling ad hominems.

 

[asterisktom]

Isn't this what the Gnostics taught that Paul condemns as false doctrine?

I was quoting Scripture, Amy, whole passages of Scripture. Rather than deal with any of the Scriptural points I raised you just went for the tar brush. How do you even know what is heresy until you come to grips with the actual passages?

 

[JesusFan]

I was quoting Scripture, Amy, whole passages of Scripture. Rather than deal with any of the Scriptural points I raised you just went for the tar brush. How do you even know what is heresy until you come to grips with the actual passages?

maybe because its NOT taught in the Bible, and has always been condemned by the Christian Church as heresy?

 

[preacher4truth]

maybe because its NOT taught in the Bible, and has always been condemned by the Christian Church as heresy?

Exactly. What has happened is Amy hasn't agreed with his interpretation, not that she hasn't agreed with Scripture.

 

[JesusFan]

Exactly. What has happened is Amy hasn't agreed with his interpretation, not that she hasn't agreed with Scripture.

Still looking to find where the Church was raptured out of this World, and when Millinium came to earth!

 

[preacher4truth]

Still looking to find where the Church was raptured out of this World, and when Millinium came to earth!

Well, it's all been "spiritualized." It's an out. Most of this interpretation stems from others feling they had to defend Jesus and His Words that said generation would not pass away until all is fulfilled, so they jumped on Josephus and the spiritualization due to extra biblical "revelation" ensued. Fear of man caused these answers.

Did those in the church scattered around the world also get raptured, and we have records from all of these other regions of these facts?

The millennium is not now.

He came in physical form the first time, and He will and is coming in His glorified body next time.

They're neo-gnostics my friend.

 

[OldRegular]

It is like you are actually determined to read my posts totally wrong.

No, Christ did not raise from the dead as "pure spirit". He had a visible, touchable body.

You know what? It just dawned on me that no matter what I write you will still respond in this willfully uncharitable way. Rather than get further into an argument with a Christian brother (though you don't see me that way) I am going to quit responding to you on this thread. I really don't want to just argue. These are wonderful and encouraging topics, but I want to discuss therm scripturally, not fling ad hominems.

You are mistaken. I did not respond in an uncharitable manner other than the possible acronym HHP . I posted Scripture and ask questions. How else can I understand what you believe?

Regarding my post with the passage from 1 Thessalonians:

It is my understanding, from my limited reading about hyper-preterism, that they believe this passage, declaring a resurrection of Saints, was fulfilled in 70 AD Yet they say that there will be no more bodily resurrections. So I ask the two questions:

1. If a bodily resurrection took place here what happened to all those Saints who were resurrected?

2. What about those who were alive and caught up in the air?

It seems to me that the hyper preterists are saying that there will be two types of Saints in heaven, those with glorified bodies and those without. I really am curious about your explanation.

Regarding my post with the passage from 1 Corinthians I had very similar questions:

Are you insisting that pure spirit can be seen?

If nothing came out of the tomb why was the stone rolled away? Who or what did the women see?

Finally I have never said I don't see you as a Christian brother. I do however reject the doctrine of full- or hyper-preterism and believe it to be heretical as I do hyper-dispensationalism because they are rejecting Scripture. I suspect that many of my dispensational brethern consider me a heretic because I reject the rapture, a seven year tribulation, and an earthly millennium. In fact I suspect that some dispensationalists and others, dare I call them free-willers, doubt my salvation but they can't say it in so many words

If my memory is correct you were posting from Texas the last time I was on the Forum. I thought your posts were well presented though there were none on preterism. Again if my memory is correct I believe you adhered to and discussed New Covenant theology rather than Covenant theology. If I am wrong please forgive my memory.

 

[OldRegular]

Isn't this what the Gnostics taught that Paul condemns as false doctrine?

I believe that it was the Apostle John who dealt with Gnostism. Paul criticized the Sadducees. That being said I believe that the doctrines of both the Gnostics and the Sadducees are far different than the full-preterists. The Gnostics denied that Jesus Christ came in the flesh [1 John 4:3] and the Sadducees say there is neither resurrection, angels, or spirits.[Acts 23:8]
,

 

[Amy.G]

I had to look up Gnosticism.

From Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary.

1. Gnosticism was a constant threat to the New Testament Church.

2. Both Paul and John taught against it.

3. Early church fathers warned against it, such as Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Ephiphanius, and Tertullian.

4. Gnostics believed all matter was evil, therefore the body was evil. Only the spiritual was good.

5. The word "Gnostic" comes from the word Gnosis, the Greek word for knowledge. Paul emphasized that wisdom and knowledge come from God not idle speculations, fables, and moral laxity. (Col. 2:8-23)

More later.

 

[Aaron]

This post below is excerpted and adapted from my most recent Xanga article, Preterist Response to a Futurist. I post it here, with a few modifications, to focus on one aspect of this resurrection question: Just what will we be like?

In this 15th chapter of First Corinthians we have a series of contrasts between the new life and the old, the things we will become contrasted to those things we are being saved from. Those good qualities of the new creature (v. 42-44) are: incorruption, glory, power, spiritual. Then we read about the originators of the two classes, Adam and Christ. Adam "became a living being". Christ, "a life-giving Spirit." KJV unhelpfully provides "became", which is not at all the point.

Then we come to a very important, oft-overlooked, detail. Overlooked in application, the origins of these two persons. (Skipping v. 46 for this post):

"The first man is of the earth (ἐκ γῆς), earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven (ἐξ οὐρανοῦ) ."

This passage is a continuation of verse 40: somata epigeia and somata epourania now become "ek ges" and "ex ouranou". This preposition (ek, ex - the forms only differ because of euphonics) shows origin. Adam came from the earth, from the dust. This brings to mind the very passage from Genesis. The "Second Adam" came from heaven. Note: In both cases, the origins determine the essence of who these two are - and (v. 48) the essence of their "followers".

Verse 49 says that "we shall [or "let us"] bear the image of the heavenly man" (the Second Adam, from heaven).

Now here is the Preterist application:

We shall be like Christ.
And what is Christ like - according to this passage? He is like He was when He came to Earth. He is spiritual.
Was Christ fleshly before he came here to Earth? No. He was pure Spirit.
We - according to this passage - will also be like Him.
Pure spirit.

We cannot have part Adam's essence ("dust") and part Christ's, seeing that we could not then "enter into the Kingdom of God". "Dust" has to do with "flesh and blood", not spirit.

I find it so much easier to say that we shall be changed, and that the body raised will be a spiritual body, NOT an earthly one. The Scriptures say this straight out. :thumbs:

 

[asterisktom]

I find it so much easier to say that we shall be changed, and that the body raised will be a spiritual body, NOT an earthly one. The Scriptures say this straight out. :thumbs:

I appreciate the appeal to Scripture. May I ask where exactly the "spiritual body" verse is?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I find it so much easier to say that we shall be changed, and that the body raised will be a spiritual body, NOT an earthly one. The Scriptures say this straight out. :thumbs:

'Spitiritual, yes. Body, also yes.
The body that Jesus had when He rose from the grave was clearly different in some respects from the one that went into the tomb, but it was still a physical, flesh and blood body. 'And He said to them, "Why are you troubled? And why do doubts arise in your hearts? Behold My hands and feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see for a spirit [Greek, pneuma] does not have flesh and blood as you see I have." When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His feet. But while they still did not believe for joy and marvelled, He said to them, "Have you any food here?" So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. And He took it and ate in their presence.'

That body was the one in which our Lord ascended into heaven. It is the same body in which He will return from heaven (Acts 1:11). And since Christ is the firstfruits (cf. Lev 23:9-11) from the dead (1Cor 15:23), we shall rise in the same sort of body that He has. Yes it is spiritual, inasmuch as it will not be subject to decay, but we shall not be spirits, any more that He was.

Steve