The root stock is the tree and they are all grafted onto it and become one tree.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Christology and Preterism
- Thread starter John of Japan
- Start date
- Status
The root stock is the tree and they are all grafted onto it and become one tree.
Due to the rather loud noises made on this side of The Pond, I want to let those on the Other Side of The Pond know that inspiration of the AV 1611 is not a Fundamental of the Faith. Yes, there are some hold to that position rather loudly, but it isn't. The kerfluffle arose out of the battles over the inspiration of Scripture. Further questions on this particular topic should be asked in the Versions Forum.
The New Jerusalem...
Revelation 21
12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
13 On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.
14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
Both are there in the New Jerusalem distinct from each other but not separate.
HankD
I would be KJV preferred, but not KJV only as there is only one church near here that is KJV and that is S&P Baptist, ultra Calvinist.
...which question is a red herring with ZILCH scriptural reference.
Does your brand of "Christology" hold to the Impeccability of Christ?
Do you consider Him to be impeccable? We Preterists 100% hold to His impeccability. Do you?
Is there something hard to understand in his words when He plainly states that His coming would occur before that generation passed away?
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be accomplished. Mt 24
30 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, until all these things be accomplished. Mk 13
32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all things be accomplished. Lk 21
That some standing there with Him would not die before He be come?:
28 Verily I say unto you, there are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Mt 16
And your intent is to smear us because we take Him at His word?
Last edited:
prophecy70
Active Member
Spot on!
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
28. Taste of death] Compare
The valiant never taste of death but once. Jul. Caes. Act. ii. 2.
St Matthew’s version of this “hard saying” indicates more plainly than the other Synoptic Gospels, the personal presence of Christ. St Mark has, “till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power;” St Luke, “till they see the kingdom of God;” but the meaning in each case is the same. Various solutions are given. The expression is referred to (1) the Transfiguration, (2) the Day of Pentecost, (3) the Fall of Jerusalem. The last best fulfils the conditions of interpretation—a judicial coming—a signal and visible event, and one that would happen in the lifetime of some, but not of all, who were present.
Transfiguration- Who was Dead?
Pentecost- Besides Judas, Who was dead?
AD 70- who was alive?
Yet still, preterists rail on me, but they have yet to answer the OP. To preterists, one and all: did Jesus come spiritually in AD 70, or did He come physically? If He came spiritually, what was going on with His body? If it was an "out of body" experience for Him, how was that different from the New Agers? And if it was not like the New Agers' doctrine, was Christ's body dead in Heaven, since "the body without the spirit is dead" (James 2:26)?
This is not a complicated problem. Don't try to muddy the waters by sidetracking this thread. Just answer the OP, Mr. Preterist. I just want a good, doctrinal answer--if one exists.
If a preterist can't answer the question, he might say with honesty, "Well, John, I can't answer that, but I'm still going to be a preterist." Or, he might say, "That's a great question, John, I'm going to try to think about it and work it through Scripturally."
This is not a complicated problem. Don't try to muddy the waters by sidetracking this thread. Just answer the OP, Mr. Preterist. I just want a good, doctrinal answer--if one exists.
If a preterist can't answer the question, he might say with honesty, "Well, John, I can't answer that, but I'm still going to be a preterist." Or, he might say, "That's a great question, John, I'm going to try to think about it and work it through Scripturally."
Last edited:
Please don't believe that this answers the OP, because it does not. It brings up an interesting subject that preterists might think makes their own point, but it misses completely the OP.
I might ask in return something more in line with the OP: What is a "judicial coming"? Please define it. Is it a physical appearance by Christ or a spiritual appearance?
To the Preterists concerning the "taste of death" statement. Personally, I don't consider it relevant at all to the OP. My interpretation is that the fulfillment of Christ's words occurred right after the prophecy at the Transfiguration. If you disagree, fine. My interpretation is perfectly valid, as attested by many, many scholars. If you want to open a thread on the interpretation of that verse, fine. I may or may not participate.
In the meantime, you are not answering the OP, which is about whether the alleged coming of Christ in AD 70 was spiritual or physical. If it was spiritual, what happened to the body of Christ? This is a very straightforward question. If a preterist can't answer it, he should just say so and not obfuscate and not try to derail the thread. Don't accuse me of mocking or attacking you. I'm just asking a very valid question about your beliefs.
In the meantime, you are not answering the OP, which is about whether the alleged coming of Christ in AD 70 was spiritual or physical. If it was spiritual, what happened to the body of Christ? This is a very straightforward question. If a preterist can't answer it, he should just say so and not obfuscate and not try to derail the thread. Don't accuse me of mocking or attacking you. I'm just asking a very valid question about your beliefs.
prophecy70
Active Member
Something like this?
The argument runs simply like this: If Jesus ascended visibly and in a physical body, and He is to come in the same way as He left, then He is to return visibly and in a physical body. And since this clearly has not happened yet, for we have no record of Him coming to the earth, nor is He here with us now; there is therefore a future coming of Christ.
The majority opinion of the nature of the Second Coming is that it will be a future to us, physical, visible, bodily return of the Lord Jesus Christ to earth that every eye will see. Does our text in Acts 1:11 teach a physical bodily Second Coming?
and they also said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven." (Acts 1:11 NASB)
They say that His ascension was physical and visible, so won't His return be also? It says He will come in "just the same way." The words "just the same way" are the Greek phrase "hon tropon." By examining the usage of "hon tropon" in the New Testament, it is clear that this phrase does not mean: "exactly the same in every detail," but has the idea of: "similar in some fashion." For example, look at how this phrase is used in:
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a (hon tropon) hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it! (Luke 13:34 NASB)
Did Jesus want to gather Jerusalem in exactly the same manner as (hon tropon) a hen gathers her chicks? I don't think so. So in "just the same way" doesn't mean: "in exactly the same manner." That His coming was not to be "exactly" as He left (Acts 1:11) is made clear by comparing Scripture with Scripture. Notice what Matthew says about His coming:
"For just as the lightning comes from the east, and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be. (Matthew 24:27 NASB)
This is obviously different than what Acts 1:11 describes. So which way is it, visibly in a cloud or like lightning? But Paul describes Christ's coming this way:
For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. (1 Thessalonians 4:16 NASB)
This is not "just the same way" as Luke describes in Acts. And what about:
and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, 8 dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. (2 Thessalonians 1:7-8 NASB)
This is also different than Acts 1:11. Here we have angels and flaming fire dealing out retribution. We don't see this in Acts. Notice what John says in:
And I saw heaven opened; and behold, a white horse, and He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True; and in righteousness He judges and wages war. (Revelation 19:11 NASB)
John has Jesus coming on a horse, not a cloud. So how can anyone say that Jesus is going to come exactly how He left when they read Acts 1:11? When you compare Scripture with Scripture, it just doesn't add up.
The Ascension and Promised Return, Acts 1:9-11
The argument runs simply like this: If Jesus ascended visibly and in a physical body, and He is to come in the same way as He left, then He is to return visibly and in a physical body. And since this clearly has not happened yet, for we have no record of Him coming to the earth, nor is He here with us now; there is therefore a future coming of Christ.
The majority opinion of the nature of the Second Coming is that it will be a future to us, physical, visible, bodily return of the Lord Jesus Christ to earth that every eye will see. Does our text in Acts 1:11 teach a physical bodily Second Coming?
and they also said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven." (Acts 1:11 NASB)
They say that His ascension was physical and visible, so won't His return be also? It says He will come in "just the same way." The words "just the same way" are the Greek phrase "hon tropon." By examining the usage of "hon tropon" in the New Testament, it is clear that this phrase does not mean: "exactly the same in every detail," but has the idea of: "similar in some fashion." For example, look at how this phrase is used in:
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a (hon tropon) hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it! (Luke 13:34 NASB)
Did Jesus want to gather Jerusalem in exactly the same manner as (hon tropon) a hen gathers her chicks? I don't think so. So in "just the same way" doesn't mean: "in exactly the same manner." That His coming was not to be "exactly" as He left (Acts 1:11) is made clear by comparing Scripture with Scripture. Notice what Matthew says about His coming:
"For just as the lightning comes from the east, and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be. (Matthew 24:27 NASB)
This is obviously different than what Acts 1:11 describes. So which way is it, visibly in a cloud or like lightning? But Paul describes Christ's coming this way:
For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. (1 Thessalonians 4:16 NASB)
This is not "just the same way" as Luke describes in Acts. And what about:
and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, 8 dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. (2 Thessalonians 1:7-8 NASB)
This is also different than Acts 1:11. Here we have angels and flaming fire dealing out retribution. We don't see this in Acts. Notice what John says in:
And I saw heaven opened; and behold, a white horse, and He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True; and in righteousness He judges and wages war. (Revelation 19:11 NASB)
John has Jesus coming on a horse, not a cloud. So how can anyone say that Jesus is going to come exactly how He left when they read Acts 1:11? When you compare Scripture with Scripture, it just doesn't add up.
The Ascension and Promised Return, Acts 1:9-11
I would actually prefer that you think for yourself rather than quote some very long item from some website.
Having said that, no, not like that. The author of that essay does not answer my question. In fact, the author does not even mention the preterist doctrine of a spiritual coming anywhere on the page referenced.
My point is not whether or not Christ will come physically in His 2nd coming, though I believe He will. My point is in regards to preterist teaching. If He came spiritually the first time, as preterists say, how did He do that? Did He leave His body in Heaven?
Does Jesus come spiritually, leaving his body dead, in this situation:
Mat 18:20 - “For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.”
?You can't just answer his question?
No. He didn't "come spiritually" in that case. This is not really a parallel passage to the many prophecies of the 2nd Coming of Christ. It is not "coming," it is "being" (Greek copula, 1st pers. sing.).
Last edited:
He is with us by the Holy Spirit, correct?
The key to me is what happens at His second coming event, and AD 70 had NONE of that happening!
prophecy70
Active Member
Why are we limited to either spiritually or physically? He is Jesus. I'm sure he has no limits. I believe what he said he did Came in AD 70 In judgement. If you believe God came spiritually through armies then so be it. I don't see a limitation that way.
So Jesus is bound to his ressurected body? I don't understand the "limits" to him. He can either come spiritually or physically? He has limits?
His "body" can hear 7 billion people talk see everyone of us and know everything about us.
So Jesus is bound to his ressurected body? I don't understand the "limits" to him. He can either come spiritually or physically? He has limits?
His "body" can hear 7 billion people talk see everyone of us and know everything about us.
Last edited:
I'm not sure you are understanding the discussion. I cannot limit Christ to "either spiritually or physically." He Himself has limited Himself. Please, by all means read and meditate on Phil. 2:5-11, a very precious passage about how Jesus limited Himself. And I would suggest that you a good doctrines book and read the chapter on Christ's incarnation.
Reading this post, I do feel like you are genuinely trying to think through the subject. Keep up the good work.
Yes, Christ has the self-imposed limit of humanity, though His deity is infinite. He became just like us so that He could save us. And no, He cannot come "either spiritually or physically." He comes as the hypostatic union, 100% God and 100% human. You can't divide Him up, and say that this time was physical but that time was spiritual.
No, Jesus as God, not His body, can hear an infinite number of people. His body while He was on earth had the same physical limitations as we do. When he walked on water, that was with God's power, not human power. (And why do you put "body" in quotes, as if it was not a real body?) Now, He has a resurrection body, much better than our earthly bodies but still a physical body. We will be like Him someday, also receiving resurrection bodies.
- Status