Christology and Preterism

[Yeshua1]

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.

In the Incarnation, God the Son chose to become a Man forever, and His body will always be the same one that he was raised up in!

 

[Yeshua1]

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.

Jesus chose to "limit" Himself to being a Man, so when God became man, that was forever!

 

[John of Japan]

So, on this thread I've seen obfuscation, personal attacks, attempts to derail the thread, etc. But I've not seen a single credible answer to my OP. I must conclude that preterists, at least those on the BB, do not have an answer (not that I've seen an answer to my approach on any preterist website anywhere).

I've got to go. Sayonara for now.

 

[prophecy70]

Neither.
The same way God did in the OT?
Its Hebraic prophetic idiom used by the prophets to foretell the downfall of nations and individuals by God in history. It is uniquely apocalyptic and hyperbolic in nature. So also Christ, being of this well-known prophetic tradition, used the same apocalyptic language to foretell the downfall of Israel at her greatest Day of the Lord judgment at AD 66-70 (e.g., compare Matthew 24:29-30 to Isaiah 13:10-11concerning Babylon and Ezekiel 32:7-8concerning Nebuchadnezzar and Egypt.)


It's prophetic language about judgement. Not literal physical coming.

 

[agedman]

Eschatology is the study of future things, of prophecy fulfilled and unfulfilled in the Bible. This thread will have a much more narrow focus, so please don't make it about prophecy per se. Eschatology intersects with Christology, the doctrine of Christ in the doctrine of the Second Coming. However, more importantly to the cause of orthodox Christianity, the full preterist insistence that Christ came spiritually in AD 70 has very serious consequences for Christology proper.

Consider. If Christ came spiritually in AD 70, but did not come physically, then the hypostatic union of Christ as 100% human and 100% God is not true. This doctrine was formulated way back in 325 at the first Council of Nicea in opposition to Arianism. Arius (c. 250-336) was a popular elder from Alexandria who developed a Christology that said Christ was truly a Person, though He was not equally God with the Father, but was eternally subordinate. In answer to this heresy, the council's phraseology was that Christ was 100% God and 100% Man, with neither being subordinate. This is called the hypostatic union.

Later, in the 5th century came the Nestorians, and the Nestorian heresy (which Nestorius probably did not teach) was that the deity and humanity of Christ were separate instead of united.

If the hypostatic union of Christ is true (and it is), then full preterism denies this doctrine. Preterism says that Christ came spiritually in AD 70, and therefore there is no need for a physical coming of Christ. But if Christ came spiritually, then the deity and humanity of Christ were divided. How could the spiritual part of Christ come to earth and the physical part stay in Heaven? The human soul of Christ and the spiritual nature, God Himself, are eternally united in Christ.

So when was the soul/spirit of Christ divided from the physical body? On the cross!! With that as a basis for thought, full preterism must then say, "Well, Christ came spiritually, but then His body in Heaven died at that time. Can you see how absurd this is?

Christ died once.

The return is NEVER pictured in prophecy as one meek or sneaking in, but with such force that groups are assigned to look for the dead bodies to put up flags, so that other groups can come along as burial teams.

It is impossible for Christ to separate from Himself, again. For He has ascended to the Father, and is worthy to open the scroll

John stated, “With that as a basis for thought, full preterism must then say, "Well, Christ came spiritually, but then His body in Heaven died at that time. Can you see how absurd this is?”

Absolutely.

 

[prophecy70]

Christ died once.

The return is NEVER pictured in prophecy as one meek or sneaking in, but with such force that groups are assigned to look for the dead bodies to put up flags, so that other groups can come along as burial teams.

It is impossible for Christ to separate from Himself, again. For He has ascended to the Father, and is worthy to open the scroll

John stated, “With that as a basis for thought, full preterism must then say, "Well, Christ came spiritually, but then His body in Heaven died at that time. Can you see how absurd this is?”

Absolutely.

This is not how we see it. Your making a question multiple choice with no right answer.

 

[agedman]

This is not how we see it. Your making a question multiple choice with no right answer.

Well it is unfortunate that you cling to a view despite the abundant posts exposing it as faulty. But, that is the nature of the B.B.

John of Japan ask a very good and logical question concerning a key matter of the preterist view. It remained unanswered throughout the pages of posts.

The question concerns the union of Spirit and body.

Perhaps you will answer that basic question.

 

[prophecy70]

Well it is unfortunate that you cling to a view despite the abundant posts exposing it as faulty. But, that is the nature of the B.B.

Thanks for the laugh. But actually after being on here I've actually grown in my belief in that "view"

The question concerns the union of Spirit and body.

Perhaps you will answer that basic question

I said neither. Is this multiple choice with no right answer? I said his coming in ad 70 was just prophect language about judgement on a nation.

Does Jesus praying to God if he is God deny the Trinity?

 

[TCassidy]

I said neither. Is this multiple choice with no right answer? I said his coming in ad 70 was just prophect language about judgement on a nation.

So there is no second coming. Just "prophect [SIC] language about judgement on a nation?"

 

[prophecy70]

So there is no second coming. Just "prophect [SIC] language about judgement on a nation?"

In the Olivet Discourse yes.

 

[TCassidy]

In the Olivet Discourse yes.

So, if, as you say, the Second Coming occurred i n 70 AD and the events of the Olivet Discourse were in 70 AD but the events of that passage don't include the Second Coming, when did/will the Second Coming occur and where is that event foretold in Scripture?

 

[Covenanter]

So, on this thread I've seen obfuscation, personal attacks, attempts to derail the thread, etc. But I've not seen a single credible answer to my OP. I must conclude that preterists, at least those on the BB, do not have an answer (not that I've seen an answer to my approach on any preterist website anywhere).

I've got to go. Sayonara for now.

I answered your OP question on the first page, q.v. You don't accept my answer. That's your problem, not mine. You're not my professor. I've learnt from this discussion & my views may have been modified - but not changed. Jesus prophesied that he would come in the lifetime of the generation that rejected him. There would be clear signs of his coming in the clouds. All the tribes of the land would "see" the one they refused to see during his ministry. He specifically told his accusers:

Mat. 26:64 Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”​

He's quoting Daniel who prophesied his victory & ascension:

Dan. 7:13 “I was watching in the night visions,
And behold, One like the Son of Man,
Coming with the clouds of heaven!
He came to the Ancient of Days,
And they brought Him near before Him.
14 Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom,
That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion,
Which shall not pass away,
And His kingdom the one
Which shall not be destroyed.​

Yes, they saw him by the signs of his coming in judgment. I'll quote a verse of a hymn I wrote:

3. Revelation 6, seal 6
Signs on earth and signs in heaven
Warn of wrath about to fall.
Where can rebels flee from judgement?
Turn, repent, on Jesus call!
Sinners try to hide from judgement;
Dens and caves and rocks and earth;
Call on rocks to hide from Jesus;
Christ the Lamb now come in wrath.​

I believe Jesus came in the events relating to the AD 70 destruction as he prophesied, being seen in the clouds by the signs he gave.

Mat 24:30 - “Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.​

Added - "all the tribes of the earth" can also be translated "all the tribes of the land" which fits the destruction context.​

I believe he will come in glory at the end of time for resurrection of the redeemed to eternal glory & the unjust to eternal separation from God in hell.

John 5:28 Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

2 Thes. 1:9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe, because our testimony among you was believed.​

In no way do those beliefs contradict my belief in the "hypostatic union" aka the perfect deity & humanity of our Saviour & Redeemer the Lord Jesus Christ.

Your fundamental error here is to reinterpret the teaching of others, using false logic, so that it is contrary to Scripture.

The problem, John, is that we come to Scripture with a basic set of presuppositions which have a huge amount in common - fundamentals - together with interpretations which accept as supported by Scripture, but can be challenged. Eschatology is one that gives cause for serious arguments, mainly because interpretation is the issue, not the statements of Scripture.

We agree on the "hypostatic union" of Christ, perfect deity & perfect humanity, & no amount of "logic" can refute that belief.

I hope you are familiar with Lewis Carroll & his "Humpty Dumpty" linguistic discussion. It should be mandatory for all theology students..

Enjoy your glory.

I hope you're sitting safely

 

[Covenanter]

....... There's glory for you!'

'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'

 

[prophecy70]

So, if, as you say, the Second Coming occurred i n 70 AD and the events of the Olivet Discourse were in 70 AD but the events of that passage don't include the Second Coming, when did/will the Second Coming occur and where is that event foretold in Scripture?

I dont see the "second coming" as happening in AD 70. We have different views on what the Second coming is.

Like I said, Im not a complete preterist, I have not read/learned enough to make any conclusions on revelation.

If Jesus shows up splits the mountain in two, and every one in the world sees him. Great!

I don't see the olivet discourse talking about this event either way, my only such argument, was Matthew 24, is talking about the destruction of the temple and nothing more.

I do want to hear more arguments on either side about the "second coming" and "Judgement day" from the Preterist side and the Historicist side, ( I know your side well enough 20 years believing it).

 

[agedman]

I answered your OP question on the first page, q.v. You don't accept my answer. That's your problem, not mine. You're not my professor. I've learnt from this discussion & my views may have been modified - but not changed. Jesus prophesied that he would come in the lifetime of the generation that rejected him.

There are two types of prophetic statements used in Scriptures.

Those that would take place immediately, and those that were on a continuum.

• An example of an "immediate" would be like the flood of Noah. It took a century to be fulfilled, but it came in Noah's lifetime.

• An example of a "continuum" would be the promise of the Messiah given first in Eden. It took some 6000 years to be fulfilled.

One should not be confused between the two.

A single element that the continuum has the immediate doesn't is the additional information added to the initial prophecy as God appoints the "signs" that will be evident of the promise.

• Noah was given a prophecy, he preached with no effect, but no further "sign" was given.

• Throughout the Scriptures the "signs" of both the first and second advent are given. Each with more information and more specifics.

Therefore, the statements of Mark 13 is not to be taken as "immediate" but that of the continuum.

There is no reason to invent some limited timeline concerning the return of Christ having to occur within a certain generation.

The continuum shows that the prophecy will be fulfilled just as God said it, without regard to the demands of human timelines.

 

[TCassidy]

I know your side well enough 20 years believing it

So, you know the Historic Chilliast position and held it for 20 years? Great. Outline it for me. (Don't Google it, just tell me from your own knowledge what Historic Chilliasm teaches.)

 

[Yeshua1]

In the Olivet Discourse yes.

So there was a spiritual second coming AD 70. and another physical one yet to come then?

 

[agedman]

The manipulation of prophecy is nothing new.

Even the religious leaders knew the place and signs of the birth of the messiah. Yet, never showed up.

Seems I recall a parable about a wedding feast that talks about guests not showing up.

 

[prophecy70]

So there was a spiritual second coming AD 70. and another physical one yet to come then?

I'm not sure where you got that from.

 

[HankD]

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)

Second Coming of whom?

You conveniently overlook "This Jesus" not "This Titus".

It can't be both.

It was not Titus the Roman general who was "taken up from you into heaven" but Jesus Christ the Son of God who will be returning visibly -
they were looking into the PHYSICAL sky with their PHYSICAL eyes (not mentioned in the Luke passage about the hen and chicks).

They/We LOOK with our PHYSICAL eyes not our imagination:

Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.


HankD