Acts 1:9-11 utterly refutes Hyper-preterism

[Martin Marprelate]

I posted this on another thread recently, but none of the Hyper-preterists seemed to want to make a comment on it, so here it is again.

The meaning of the word 'see' is determined in English by the context. Its usual meaning is to see with the eyes, to make visual contact. If I were to say to someone, "I saw your sister yesterday" he would naturally suppose that I had seen her with my eyes, unless of course I added, "In a dream." If, on the other hand, I say to someone, "I see what you mean," he will understand that I am using the word 'see' in the sense of comprehending. The context decides.

Greek is no different. The context will determine the meaning, although the wide variety of words for 'see' used will also be helpful. Now let's look at Acts 1:9-11.

v 9. 'Now when [Jesus] had spoken these things, while [the Apostles] watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight'

The Greek word translated 'watch' here in the NKJV is blepo, which is one of the main words for seeing. I recommend a word search, which will reveal that in the vast majority of cases it means to see with the eyes. Therefore, unless there is some over-riding contextual reason to do otherwise, blepo should be taken to mean simply 'see.' The Greek construction is a Genitive Absolute: 'With them watching' would be a literal translation. The NIV translates it as 'Before their very eyes'. If you look also at Luke's other account of the Ascension (Luke 24:50f), it seems that as He was in the act of blessing them, with arms raised, He levitated and rose into the sky while the Apostles watched. He rose upwards until a cloud obscured the Apostles' sight of Him.

v10. 'And while they looked steadfastly (Gk. atenizo) towards heaven as He went up , behold, two men stood by them in white apparel.'

They had been looking up as the Lord rose and remained looking (open-mouthed, no doubt) after He disappeared. The Greek word atenizo always means to look closely, or to fasten the eyes upon something.

v11. 'Who also said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing (Gk. emblepo) up into heaven? This same Jesus who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw (Gk. theaomai) Him go into heaven."'
Emblepo, tranlated 'gaze' here, usually means, 'to turn one's eyes upon' or simply to 'look.' In Matt 6:26, it could be translated 'consider,' but there is no reason to suppose that the Apostles were 'considering' the heavens. The Greek word for 'saw' in v11 is theaomai which again always means to 'view' or 'observe attentively' with the eyes.

I don't know what could be clearer than this. The Apostles saw with their eyes Jesus rise at least part of the way towards heaven. He left visibly; He will return visibly 'in like manner'. People saw Him leave; people will see Him return. He left with a physical body (Luke 24:38-43); He will return in a physical body. A cloud parted them from Him; a cloud will part to reveal Him (Rev 1:7; cf. 19:11).

These verses utterly refute Hyper-preterism. It is just the end of the story. The context and the language simply will not allow the idea of an invisible departure, and will therefore not allow the idea of an invisible return.

 

[asterisktom]

These verses utterly refute Hyper-preterism. It is just the end of the story. The context and the language simply will not allow the idea of an invisible departure, and will therefore not allow the idea of an invisible return.

This old saw. I personally have written on this several times. I just woke up, but I can start by pointing out an error in one sentence of yours (one of many), the part I underlined.

"and a cloud received him out of their sight.
And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up..." vss. 9-10

Two events here:
1. A cloud received Him out of their sight. He became invisible.
2. They were still looking as He continued going up.

Your comment (underlining mine):"They had been looking up as the Lord rose and remained looking (open-mouthed, no doubt) after He disappeared."
flatly contradicts what Scripture says. But, like your "for example" additions in the Luke passage in an earlier thread, they are suggested by your theology, not by the text.

So, the second part of His going was invisible. And it was during His invisible ascending that the angels gave their assurance. A very reasonable assumption is that the invisibility itself was a part of their description of His return.

I don't know what could be clearer than this.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

This old saw. I personally have written on this several times.

I have seen some of your postings on this text. They were no more convincing than this one is. They seem to me to be desperate attempts at obfuscation.

I just woke up, but I can start by pointing out an error in one sentence of yours (one of many), the part I underlined.

"and a cloud received him out of their sight.
And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up..." vss. 9-10

Two events here:
1. A cloud received Him out of their sight. He became invisible.
2. They were still looking as He continued going up.

Your comment (underlining mine):"They had been looking up as the Lord rose and remained looking (open-mouthed, no doubt) after He disappeared."
flatly contradicts what Scripture says. But, like your "for example" additions in the Luke passage in an earlier thread, they are suggested by your theology, not by the text.

So, the second part of His going was invisible. And it was during His invisible ascending that the angels gave their assurance. A very reasonable assumption is that the invisibility itself was a part of their description of His return.

I don't know what could be clearer than this.

More obfuscation. That the Apostles remained looking upward after He disappeared is indicated by verse 11, but that is really not the issue.

You seem to have conceded that the Apostles saw the Lord Jesus commence His return to heaven. 'With them watching' is the literal translation of verse 9. So first He was visible to them (in a body of 'flesh and bones' remember); then He was not visible as the clouds, 'Received Him out of the sight'. He will return in 'like manner' to the way that He left. So we simply reverse the process. First He is invisible to the earth, being on the far side of the clouds; then the clouds part to reveal Him, in the same 'flesh and bones' body in which He left.

Unless you can show that this happened in AD 70, Hyper-preterism is proved to be wrong. This is by no means the only refutation of H.P., but it is the simplest and clearest.

Steve

 

[asterisktom]

I have seen some of your postings on this text. They were no more convincing than this one is. They seem to me to be desperate attempts at obfuscation.

If you want to be taken seriously don't deign to be a mind-reader and say that I am "desperate". Aside from being rude - which I expect from you as a matter of course - it adds nothing to your credibility in the eyes of others who are reading this. Neither was I "obfuscating".

I spent 30+ years with your view (at least in its basic features) until I finally just did some study in the Word and came to my conclusion. When I came to this conclusion (Preterism) it was a wonderful relief, not desperation. Suddenly a whole group of verses finally fit perfectly well with each other.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Whether you are desperate or not, you are obfuscating. However, it is interesting to note that for thirty plus years you did no Bible study.
Deal with the text. You have not shown how Act 1:9-11 'fit perfectly well' with a Hyper-preterist position.

Steve

 

[asterisktom]

However, it is interesting to note that for thirty plus years you did no Bible study.

You read my posts very haphazardly. You are one of those persons where I have to laboriously phrase everything in precise words in order not to be misconstrued. I should have written some thing like "While I had indeed been studying the Bible for thirty years, it was with an admixture of other Bible "helps" which tended to negate what I was seeing in the Bible itself".

But my second option is just to ignore your willful puerilities and move on to others who have basic respect, who know how to disagree without being disagreeable.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

But my second option is just to ignore your willful puerilities and move on to others who have basic respect, who know how to disagree without being disagreeable.

Ha! It had to come; the Riggle get-out clause. Get all offended, then you won't have to deal with the thread. You have done this so often that it's getting tedious.

Deal with the text! Or should I start spelling your name with a 'W'?

Steve

 

[asterisktom]

You read my posts very haphazardly. You are one of those persons where I have to laboriously phrase everything in precise words in order not to be misconstrued. I should have written some thing like "While I had indeed been studying the Bible for thirty years, it was with an admixture of other Bible "helps" which tended to negate what I was seeing in the Bible itself".

But my second option is just to ignore your willful puerilities and move on to others who have basic respect, who know how to disagree without being disagreeable.

[This message is hidden because Martin Marprelate is on your ignore list. ]

This topic itself is an important one and I welcome further comment from others. The vast majority of futurists here have been pretty respectful, and I will strive to be the same.

 

[Greektim]

[This message is hidden because Martin Marprelate is on your ignore list. ]

This topic itself is an important one and I welcome further comment from others. The vast majority of futurists here have been pretty respectful, and I will strive to be the same.

As a "hyper preterist", how do you see God consummating the world and his plan for it? In other words, how does God achieve new creation?

 

[JesusFan]

This old saw. I personally have written on this several times. I just woke up, but I can start by pointing out an error in one sentence of yours (one of many), the part I underlined.

"and a cloud received him out of their sight.
And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up..." vss. 9-10

Two events here:
1. A cloud received Him out of their sight. He became invisible.
2. They were still looking as He continued going up.

Your comment (underlining mine):"They had been looking up as the Lord rose and remained looking (open-mouthed, no doubt) after He disappeared."
flatly contradicts what Scripture says. But, like your "for example" additions in the Luke passage in an earlier thread, they are suggested by your theology, not by the text.

So, the second part of His going was invisible. And it was during His invisible ascending that the angels gave their assurance. A very reasonable assumption is that the invisibility itself was a part of their description of His return.

I don't know what could be clearer than this.

The Lord jesus will be returning in the SAME Body that he resurrected in...

Jesus died , was resurrected in the SAME body that he died in upon the Cross, and was raised glorified, God-man!

We will all see Him, and become changed into what he now is, forever gloroed, same bodies born with/in, now put on immortality!

 

[asterisktom]

As a "hyper preterist", how do you see God consummating the world and his plan for it?

As a Hyper Preterist? Hmm. I can't answer as one of those.

As a Full Preterist I would say that God's consummation of the world has already happened. That is, if I understand your use of the term. It would be helpful if you would just give me a passage to connect your question with.

But the answer should be twofold, on a global and on a personal level. I believe we are already in the new creation, the New Heavens and New Earth. The Heavenly Jerusalem is already here and is constantly growing in size.

"Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel."

On the personal level, when we die we are ever with the Lord.

In other words, how does God achieve new creation?

If any man is in Christ he is a new creation.

 

[asterisktom]

The Lord jesus will be returning in the SAME Body that he resurrected in...

Adding to Scripture. Nowhere does it say this.

Jesus died , was resurrected in the SAME body that he died in upon the Cross, and was raised glorified, God-man!

Agreed.

We will all see Him, and become changed into what he now is, forever gloroed, same bodies born with/in, now put on immortality!

No. We will not be changed into bodies that are in any way physical. The passage that you could have quoted is the one in 1 Cor. 15:47-49

1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1Co 15:48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
1Co 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

We shall bear Christ's image. How is Christ's image described here? "The Lord from heaven".

What was Christ like when He was the Lord from Heaven? Well, we know that He definitely did not have a physical body.

This is the Christ we will be like.

Futurists speak much about being like Christ, but they really seem to be concerned about having Christ be like us.

 

[HankD]

Hmm, I'm just wondering...

This is a question for any full preterist willing to answer (and I'm a little confused about some of the statements here by the same):

It has been admited that Christ was resurrected in the same body in which He died.

Here is the question: Is Christ currently in the same body in which He died while He is presently in heaven?

If not, what happened to that body.

But if so, and He is the firstfruits of the resurrection then doesn't it follow that we the remainder of the harvest will have bodies of the same nature as the firstfruit?

But if all has happened then the preterist position must be that all that are going to be resurrected have been resurrected.

Now I do not believe this to be true being a futurist so please don't say that I believe I have missed the resurrection.

1 Corinthians 15

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. (In AD70?)
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.​

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.​

I was not here in AD70 so am I disqualified from this passage as well?

HankD​

 

[asterisktom]

Hmm, I'm just wondering...

This is a question for any full preterist willing to answer (and I'm a little confused about some of the statements here by the same):

It has been admited that Christ was resurrected in the same body in which He died.

Christ was resurrected bodily. After the ascension there was no need for Him to have a physical body, so He didn't. The only purpose for Christ taking on human form was to redeem us. His "being found in fashion as a man" was part of the necessary humiliation involved in our redemption. We have a hard time seeing this because we are too close to our physicality.

Here is the question: Is Christ currently in the same body in which He died while He is presently in heaven?

No. See above.

If not, what happened to that body.

I have no idea.

But if so, and He is the firstfruits of the resurrection then doesn't it follow that we the remainder of the harvest will have bodies of the same nature as the firstfruit?

Like I wrote just above this post, we have an important indication of what our bodies will be like from 1 Cor. 15:47-49:

1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1Co 15:48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
1Co 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

We shall bear Christ's image. How is Christ's image described here? "The Lord from heaven".

We shall bear the image of the Lord from Heaven.

What was Christ like when He was the Lord from Heaven? Well, we know that He definitely did not have a physical body.

This is the Christ we will be like.

The passage is clear. It does not say:
We shall bear the image of the Incarnated Lord, or
We shall be like the Son of David.

It clearly describes His nature by His origin.
Heaven.
Heavenly.
Not physical.

But if all has happened then the preterist position must be that all that are going to be resurrected have been resurrected.

I don't get how you say this. At any rate, this will have to do for now.

 

[OldRegular]

Tom

It seems to me that if life on earth is to continue for an unlimited time then God will have to intervene in some manner before man will be able to survive.

As I see it the big problem is energy. It may be possible that man will eventually develop a source of energy required but it is not a certainty.

 

[JesusFan]

Christ was resurrected bodily. After the ascension there was no need for Him to have a physical body, so He didn't. The only purpose for Christ taking on human form was to redeem us. His "being found in fashion as a man" was part of the necessary humiliation involved in our redemption. We have a hard time seeing this because we are too close to our physicality.

No. See above.

I have no idea.

Like I wrote just above this post, we have an important indication of what our bodies will be like from 1 Cor. 15:47-49:

1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1Co 15:48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
1Co 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

We shall bear Christ's image. How is Christ's image described here? "The Lord from heaven".

We shall bear the image of the Lord from Heaven.

What was Christ like when He was the Lord from Heaven? Well, we know that He definitely did not have a physical body.

This is the Christ we will be like.

The passage is clear. It does not say:
We shall bear the image of the Incarnated Lord, or
We shall be like the Son of David.

It clearly describes His nature by His origin.
Heaven.
Heavenly.
Not physical.


I don't get how you say this. At any rate, this will have to do for now.

Jesus in the Incarnation did something BRAND NEW...

God the Son became a Man, forever more God/Humanity linked as One being...

he is the High priest, who took his very blood unto the heavenly temple itself for offering, as per hebrews...

Jesus still has his scars/woundings, he is the God-man, he will return in glory as the SAME bodily being that he was raised up as...

IF you hold to him discarding theresurrected body in heaven...

Close to JW, who view Jesus as spiritually resurrected and spiritually returned in 1914!

 

[JesusFan]

Christ was resurrected bodily. After the ascension there was no need for Him to have a physical body, so He didn't. The only purpose for Christ taking on human form was to redeem us. His "being found in fashion as a man" was part of the necessary humiliation involved in our redemption. We have a hard time seeing this because we are too close to our physicality.

No. See above.

I have no idea.

Like I wrote just above this post, we have an important indication of what our bodies will be like from 1 Cor. 15:47-49:

1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1Co 15:48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
1Co 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

We shall bear Christ's image. How is Christ's image described here? "The Lord from heaven".

We shall bear the image of the Lord from Heaven.

What was Christ like when He was the Lord from Heaven? Well, we know that He definitely did not have a physical body.

This is the Christ we will be like.

The passage is clear. It does not say:
We shall bear the image of the Incarnated Lord, or
We shall be like the Son of David.

It clearly describes His nature by His origin.
Heaven.
Heavenly.
Not physical.


I don't get how you say this. At any rate, this will have to do for now.

Apostle paul stated that we will indeed have 'spiritual bodies" in the resurrection, John says that we will become as he now is...

Spiritual contrasted with the earthly by paul...

So physical earthly body will be replaced by glorifed physical body, who creation was/is "heavenly"

Contrasting earth and heaven, both still physical bodily forms!

 

[asterisktom]

Tom

It seems to me that if life on earth is to continue for an unlimited time then God will have to intervene in some manner before man will be able to survive.

As I see it the big problem is energy. It may be possible that man will eventually develop a source of energy required but it is not a certainty.

To be honest, OR, I don't really know how that would play out. I just take at face-value those several verses that say the earth abides forever. I don't pretend to understand how all this works out. However I do believe that there are no prophecies that require fulfillment.

I am aware of the energy problem. To me that does not seem that insurmountable, seeing that our technology should eventually provide the answers here. But this is all guesswork on my part.

 

[asterisktom]

Close to JW, who view Jesus as spiritually resurrected and spiritually returned in 1914!

Not one single rebuttal of verses that I brought up. Just the same old "You are just like a JW" attack.

Really original - and totally without foundation.

 

[TCassidy]

Do "full preterists" have communion (Lord's Supper) in their churches?

If so, why? 1 Corinthians 11:26 "For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes."