Revelation is not about the FUTURE

[Hazelelponi]

Full blown Preterism always been regarded as being heresy

It's not a book promoting heresy. I wouldn't do that. Amillennialism has been the traditional position for the professing Protestant church orthodox. That is the position the book is taking and explaining.

 

[Blank]

Before I start to ignore you, which is is? Are the tribes LITERAL TRIBES in which case 12,000 from Reuben is all about fleshly ancestry (I am not of the blood tribe of Reuben) or is it NOT about fleshly ancestry (in which case Reuben means something other than literal Reuben)?

I think I answered that in post #118 on my 2nd point...

As a Baptist, yes, I would go quite literal in comparison to theologically liberal Reformed or Preterist.

In the meantime, I do believe God has not abandoned Israel, as seen in Rev 7, nor do I believe God has replaced Israel with the Church. (Now you can put me on 'ignore').

 

[atpollard]

I think I answered that in post #118 on my 2nd point...

In the meantime, I do believe God has not abandoned Israel, as seen in Rev 7, nor do I believe God has replaced Israel with the Church. (Now you can put me on 'ignore').

Have a nice day.
I’ll waste no more time attempting to get you to communicate.
(and I can ignore you without placing you in ignore)

 

[JesusFan]

We are Israel and look at all that has happened and how she has grown these last nearly 2,000 years...

Like wow. There was an approximate 275 million people on the entire earth during Jesus' ministry.

Now there's over 2 billion professing Christians alone! 1/4 of all the people on earth!

No, they aren't all saved, but still, just wow... Jesus Christ has changed the very face of the earth.

Today, we live in a type and shadow of our glorified future with Jesus standing as the tree of life, our bread of life . when we are glorified and are standing in the reality of all that God has prepared for us it will totally be amazing because this is amazing enough! More is so awesome...

In my understanding the physical nation doesn't have to be restored for all to have been fulfilled that has been written about them, but we never know what the Lord might do and we never stop hoping because Christ is our Hope and He already has the Victory!

God's amazing...

Since the coming of the Church at Pentecost, the Lord has been dealing with Spiritual Israel, but physical Israel not totally forgotten, as much of the Coming earthly Kingdom will revolve around them during Messianic Age

 

[JesusFan]

It's not a book promoting heresy. I wouldn't do that. Amillennialism has been the traditional position for the professing Protestant church orthodox. That is the position the book is taking and explaining.

Agree that is became the dominants position after Augustine and others, who pushed that the Church of Rome was that Kingdom upon Earth, but the position held before that seemed to a type of Historical premil

 

[Blank]

It's not a book promoting heresy. I wouldn't do that. Amillennialism has been the traditional position for the professing Protestant church orthodox. That is the position the book is taking and explaining.

and Historical Premil has been the standard Church view a couple hundred years before Amil. I guess all eschatological views have their debut sometime.

 

[Hazelelponi]

and Historical Premil has been the standard Church view a couple hundred years before Amil. I guess all eschatological views have their debut sometime.

I don't think they understood, even though they understood. I think they thought it would be faster.

I would have thought the same thing on that side of the timeline. We can simply see more now.

 

[Blank]

..

 

[Blank]

I don't think they understood, even though they understood. I think they thought it would be faster.

I would have thought the same thing on that side of the timeline. We can simply see more now.

When it comes to eschatology, I'm not sure anyone understands. Look at Christ's first coming; the majority of Jews missed that one completely. I don't expect much different from Preterists, Dispys, Amillennialists, Postmillennialists, etc.

 

[asterisktom]

@asterisktom
Can a "spiritual body" weep? Pretty sure it can't. Tear ducts are physical. Yet in the Bible it says that in Heaven God will "wipe away all tears from their eyes" (Rev. 7:17, 21:4)

Along those same lines we might wonder what size God's "nostrils" are, Job. 4:9. Or we can realize that the Bible has much figurative imagery, both in the Old and New Testaments.

I just got my wifi back yesterday, or I would have answered sooner. We are staying with and helping my ailing mother-in-law in Greenville, SC, her husband being in the hospital.

I am quite behind in several correspondences and here as well. But, looking at your above responses (plural) I am not sure if I would make any headway in getting you to come around to a more Biblical understanding. Also, your left-handed insult about me possibly "trying to trick" you doesn't bode well for respectful conversation. I have been nothing but honest with you.

 

[asterisktom]

Since Jesus is the first born of many brethren (Romans 8:29) we should recall Jesus ate fish and honeycomb in the presence of the disciples to prove he was physical. (Luke 24:36-43)

We will follow in His stead in the ressurection, meaning we will be just as physical, it will simply be in a perfected form.

Then what do you do with flesh and blood not entering into the kingdom of God? You still want our future bodies to be physical, yet sans flesh and blood. Don't just follow tradition like the majority of Pharisees and scribes. Read what the Bible actually says.

 

[asterisktom]

When it comes to eschatology, I'm not sure anyone understands. Look at Christ's first coming; the majority of Jews missed that one completely. I don't expect much different from Preterists, Dispys, Amillennialists, Postmillennialists, etc.

This is a needlessly cynical outlook, as if to say that correct eschatology is impossible to find, or that no one has come upon it. Let me ask you: DId Paul teach correct eschatology? I hope you would say that he did.

Then the question remains: Did this correct eschatology just disappear with him and the other inspired writers? Did they take that with them to Heaven? Of course not.

 

[asterisktom]

And the date of AD 66 is very handy for the preterist, despite the fact that I only know one single scholar who agrees with that, and he is a liberal. No, the correct date is 95-96, as all evangelical scholars of the book agree. The only way the preterist can avoid the implications of Revelation to their position is to join the liberal and date the book before AD 70.

I haven't forgotten your other issues with my post, John. I'm just going to whittle away at them as I have time.

By liberal scholar I assume you mean Schaff. There are others. And if you want I can list a few, but it would mean tracking down that file. But I could just turn that assertion of yours around and say that the later date is based on only one ancient writer, Irenaeus, the same writer that made other unbelievable claims. All of the other "experts" were basing their assertions on his original error. I think it is Augustus Strong that made some good comments on this. Once again, I can dig that up too.

Another problem for the later date for Revelation - or for any post AD 70 date for the Bible - is the absolute silence on historical reporting on the fall of Jerusalem. Not a single word.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Then what do you do with flesh and blood not entering into the kingdom of God? You still want our future bodies to be physical, yet sans flesh and blood. Don't just follow tradition like the majority of Pharisees and scribes. Read what the Bible actually says.

Our Lord and Savior preached the ressurection of our bodies. We don't know what type of body they will be, what it will be like exactly, but from John's description and seeing Christ after His ressurection he still has a human form, even when the vision of Him is fully glorified in station according to His True Status and Nature, He still has a human form.

The multitude, though they look like the angels and are like the angels now in nature, they still have bodies in a human form.

We are indeed created in His image brother, and not our own.

To preach against the ressurection of the dead is to preach against the clear teachings of Scripture and I believe constitutes actual heresy, but I'm not a scholar or a pastor in station or an elder brother to say such a thing...

But I do caution you in Christ to please truly consider this post again in light of Scripture and reason.

The Resurrection Body | Modern Reformation

Christ is risen! He is risen indeed! Alleluia!” This cry will rise from many churches this Easter season as we rejoice in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. On the third day, the grave in which they laid his body was empty. His body had not been stolen’the posting of Roman soldiers...

www.modernreformation.org

.

When we too are ressurected from the dead (Romans 6:4-5) we are given our glorified and incorruptible bodies, and we will be like the angels (in nature, neither marrying nor given in marriage) but higher than them in status. (. ,Matthew 22:30,)

 

[asterisktom]

To preach against the ressurection of the dead is to preach against the clear teachings of Scripture and I believe constitutes actual heresy, but I'm not a scholar or a pastor in station or an elder brother to say such a thing...

...

But I do caution you in Christ to please truly consider this post again in light of Scripture and reason.

I am not preaching against the resurrection of the dead. If there is no resurrection then we have no faith, no hope. I agree that it would be heresy.

But that is not what I wrote. And I caution you, as well, to consider this matter "in light of Scripture and reason". Speaking of which, in my previous comment I alluded to 1 Cor. 15:50:

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

Please let me know your thoughts on this verse.

 

[Hazelelponi]

...


I am not preaching against the resurrection of the dead. If there is no resurrection then we have no faith, no hope. I agree that it would be heresy.

But that is not what I wrote. And I caution you, as well, to consider this matter "in light of Scripture and reason". Speaking of which, in my previous comment I alluded to 1 Cor. 15:50:

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

Please let me know your thoughts on this verse.

I agree with that. Where does Scripture teach our glorified bodies to be a corrupt thing,?

The marrying and being given in marriage and having an earthly, fleshly relationship with God is now, later, after we join Christ in His death and Resurrection, we won't have these bodies of flesh, but will be raised incorruptible on the last day

 

[asterisktom]

I agree with that. Where does Scripture teach our glorified bodies to be a corrupt thing,?

Nowhere. I don't know why you would even ask that? Please answer the part that I bolded.

The marrying and being given in marriage and having an earthly, fleshly relationship with God is now, later, after we join Christ in His death and Resurrection, we won't have these bodies of flesh, but will be raised incorruptible on the last day

I agree on not having these bodies of flesh in the afterlife. Our "last day" will be when we die. The "last day" or "last days" in the Bible was always in a Jewish context.

 

[JesusFan]

I agree with that. Where does Scripture teach our glorified bodies to be a corrupt thing,?

The marrying and being given in marriage and having an earthly, fleshly relationship with God is now, later, after we join Christ in His death and Resurrection, we won't have these bodies of flesh, but will be raised incorruptible on the last day

The same physical body God gave to us while on earth, will be raised up in a glorified physical form

 

[Blank]

This is a needlessly cynical outlook, as if to say that correct eschatology is impossible to find, or that no one has come upon it. Let me ask you: DId Paul teach correct eschatology? I hope you would say that he did.

It's not cynical. It is just saying that, for the most part, the fulfillment of prophecy does not become apparent until after its fulfillment. Paul taught and knew correct eschatology, it's just too bad that he is not here still, so we could ask him questions for clarification.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Nowhere. I don't know why you would even ask that? Please answer the part that Ibolded

Well honestly, since I thought saying "I agree" covered my views on the quoted verse I'm really not sure what you are seeking as an answer so I'll write an exposition.

You cited 1 Corinthians 15:50, where Paul declares, "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable." This verse, however, must be interpreted within the flow of Paul's broader argument concerning the resurrection body. He does not deny the physicality of the resurrection body but contrasts perishable, mortal, Adamic nature with the imperishable, glorified state wrought by union with Christ, the second Adam.

The Greek phrase "sarx kai haima" (σὰρξ καὶ αἷμα)—"flesh and blood"—is a Hebraic idiom, found also in Matthew 16:17 and Galatians 1:16, used metaphorically to describe the natural, fallen human condition, not materiality itself. Paul is not denying the resurrection of the body, but asserting the necessity of transformation—from corruptible to incorruptible, from dishonor to glory (1 Cor. 15:42–44).

Calvin, in his commentary, notes:

"Now this I say This clause intimates, that what follows is explanatory of the foregoing statement. “What I have said as to bearing the image of the heavenly Adam means this — that we must be renewed in respect of our bodies, inasmuch as our bodies, being liable to corruption, cannot inherit God’s incorruptible kingdom. Hence there will be no admission for us into the kingdom of Christ, otherwise than by Christ’s renewing us after his own image.” Flesh and blood, however, we must understand, according to the condition in which they at present are, for our flesh will be a participant in the glory of God, but it will be — as renewed and quickened by the Spirit of Christ."

Spurgeon also stated:

"for it is as the apostle puts it, “If Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the spirit is life because of righteousness.” The spirit has its resurrection even now; but we are “waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.” At the second coming of the Lord the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and the living shall be changed. We have the firstfruits of the Spirit, inasmuch as we are spiritually risen from the dead; and the rest will follow in due course.

Indeed, Romans 8:29 teaches that Christ is the prototokos (πρωτότοκος)—“firstborn among many brethren.” His resurrection body is the pattern and guarantee of ours. Luke 24:39–43 emphasizes the corporeality of the risen Christ. He ate broiled fish and honeycomb. He said, "See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." The Greek here is precise: "σάρκα καὶ ὀστέα" (flesh and bones)—not merely spirit, but transformed flesh.

Therefore, the glorified body is not a rejection of bodily form but its perfection. Berkhof rightly states in Systematic Theology:

This implies that the resurrection of the people of God will be like that of their heavenly Lord. His resurrection was a bodily resurrection, and theirs will be of the same kind.

We are not Gnostics, denying the goodness of the body. The Incarnate Word took on our nature—body and soul—and sanctified it. He rose in that same body, now glorified. To say otherwise is to drift toward the ancient heresy of Docetism or a form of hyper-preterism, both of which the early Church and Reformers firmly rejected.

[I am not accusing anyone of holding these positions, just stating the case,]

As for the "last day," Jesus Himself repeatedly speaks of the general resurrection at the end of the age in John 6:39-40, 44, 54—“I will raise him up on the last day.” That day is not merely a first-century Jewish context; it is the eschatological telos of redemptive history. Hebrews 9:28 speaks of His return “to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.”

Let us then affirm, as the Church has always confessed, that we await “the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting.” We will be like Christ—glorified and incorruptible.

I provided hyperlinks to commentaries and systematic theologies and sermons, but didn't hyperlink any of the Scriptures I quoted but will go through and do so if you like.

Hopefully, this explains my position on the verse in question to satisfaction. I did think "I agree" was just as satisfactory however.