As you have just demonstrated, Preterism has no monopoly on mixing spiritual and temporal meanings/fulfillments.
--------------------------------
Overboard spiritualization? LOL.
so a little spiritualization os ok in your book?
Look, the only spiritualization I arrive at is by comparing scripture with scripture.
How do you arrive at your personal spiritualization?
Problem is; You do the spiritualizing first (to conform to past fulfillment); then "compare" the "spiritual" interpretation. I take them for what they say. for instance, the statement of mine that you just used regarding "the spiritual coming The spiritual "coming" of Christ to the Church was the Holy Spirit in AD30 or 33. That was the beginning of their spiritual life" is based on comparing scriptures that show that Christ said He would "come to them" and be with them through the "Comforter", and that anyone who believed in Christ at the time the epistles addred to them was written was already "born from above", and spiritually alive. I don't reinterpret the scriptures first, then "compare" them and watch as my view naturally falls into place.
EB:
That is precisely what your view is describing. In mine, things are typically fulfilled (better word than "partially"), back then, then literally fulfilled in the future.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That would work, if it wasn't for the pesky fact that it is an Idea totally forign to Christ and the apostles.
As I said, neither the OT prophets, NT apostles, nor Jesus himslef taught that the "stages" would extend beyond the messianic generation.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whatever AD70 was, it was but a shadow of what we will have when Christ really subdues the nations.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, an Idea totally forign to Christ and the Apostles
You assume that; just as people back then assumed Messiah would only come once. Once again, you are taking the time statements; and then separating the rest of Church history from "that generation". Even "generation" is relative, because many of the people responsible for crucifying Christ would be long gone by AD70, and a their children would be born, and grow old, and their children be of age by that time (I think 40 was generally "old" until modern times). So once again, it cannot be about a set of individual people.
As long as birth continues, and scripture testifies it continues in the New Heavens and earth time period (Is 65:17-15), sinners will exist on earth in need of Christ's intercession.
So God punishes people in this "new earth" (New Covenant) for breaking the Kosher Laws? I thought that passed with the Old Covenant.
No, that was a conditional picture of the Kingdom with only one coming of the Messiah, accpted by and ruling thorugh physical Israel, under the Old Covenant. (So I disagree with those futurists (Dispys) who use this very passage to teach the OC will be reinstituted then, as preterists always criticize). Of course we know it did not work out that way, so this cannot be used by either preterist of futurist as an accurate picture of life in the New Heaven.
Thanks to Christ Physical Death has been restored to it's original purpose, as the vehicle God uses to bring His own into that existance.
And where do you get this from? Popular folklore? What I see is a physical world God created physical beings in, and sin brought about a fall, and a need for renewal. Even that was basically remedial. NEVER in Genesis do we see death portrayed in such a good light. NEVER is the physical decay and pains of the body and aging seen as "good as God created it". "Returning to the dust" was clearly apart of the curse! Only in the NT, do we see "death is gain", and that came as part of salvation, and even that would only lead to a resurrection, and some would not tste of it, but be caught away at Christ's return.
Your view fails to account for the sinners who reside on the New Earth right outside the new Jerusalem's gates AFTER it has descended from Heaven and AFTER the beast, Satan and false prophet have been cast into the lake of fire.
Then, in your view, the timing of that cutoff point os not fortold. It must happen sometime AFTER Satan is cast into the lake of fire, for the spirit and Bride are still calling outside the gates to all who thirst to "come in and drink".
You're still ASSUMING that that call to "come" was aimed
at the people in the storyline; rather than the READERS throughout all time (before Christ returns and it is all finished). Notice, the storyline has ended way before that. It basically ends at v.5. Then, we have John's account of his interaction with the angel. V.11 would refer back to the storyline; because it would make no sense for them to be telling people to
stay unholy! (Preterists claim this only is used to illustrate how short the time was; but thst still does not make sense. If it was so "at hand"; then people should all the more
hurry and become righteous! But even if that were true; it would further prove my point that the storyline has ended before this!). So next follows some messages from Jesus, and some warnings, and another promise to come quickly. All of this is directed to
the one readingit; for it would make no sense to warn the ones afterwards,
already in the Kingdom about having their name removed from the book of life or the plagues WRITTEN IN THE BOOK added to them!
Not exactly, I will enter heaven upon my death in my resurrection Body that God gives me upon the sowing of my natural body.
And Corinthians shows that that is the SAME body that was sown; glorified; just like Christ's. The tomb was
empty when He rose.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, I have seen preterists on the other board who do seem to think there is NOTHING after this, and that would be a consistent view, thus proving preterism is Sadduceeism!)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By that logic, The Mormon religion proves futurism is false.
No, because if all the promises apply to this current world we are in, then if you were consistent, you would conclude that there might not be anything after this. This is all that was promised; and all we need. You basically have to "reserve" some passages that if you interpreted the same way as other passages; they too would apply to this world. I only mentioned those other preterists because they are consistent.
I reject universalism myself, and you know good and well that universalism is not a preterist monopoly, so I fail to see your argument.
Once again, I mention them because they are consistent. If all the prophecies of revelation refer to AD70, then so do all the pictures of fiery punishment (which obviously could be seen to refer to the war). "Gehenna" was a burning garbage pit outside oof Jerusalem. This "lake of fire" would obviously refer to that state of destruction as well.
You yourself continuously apply "outside the city" as a spiritual condition of people today. Well, that is the "lake of fire", and if that is true, then there is no "hell" after this! Hell is the state of unbelief or "spiritual death" of unbelievers in the world today; and this is precisely how those people I mentioned take it!
I believes as the Bible states that the heart of man is wicked above all else (even Satan) and each man is tempted when he is drawn away by HIS OWN lusts.
Boy, and I thought Stevie Wonder was so unbiblcal when he sang that Satan is filled with wrath at the evils of Apartheid, which he himself frowns on! (rather than being the one who deceives men into doing this and "think[ing] they do God service"). According to you, he must have been right. But then, once again, why is he pictured as the one who led man to falling the first place? (and not just fall into the Old Covenant; but rather into total lawlessness?). Both in this, and physical death/decay; preterism ignores the Fall.
You have Humans incapable of sinning without Satan influencing them. Scripture teaches no such thing, indeed, consistant with your view, Humans don't need to believe on Christ at all, for as long as satan is out of the way, they will be sinless regardless of their belief.
Never said any of that. In the Millennium, Satan is removed, and people live peaceably unde Christ's rule; but in the end; there are still many who are not saved. There is still sin in their hearts; and when Satan is released again, then they make their final move. So no, sin is not removed without Satan; only suppressed. This is just the final stage of God's history lesson. God was doing everything that man thinks is the key to a perfect world. First, he wiped out the whole world, and started over with a righteous man (Noah). But then wickedness quickly sprung up again. Then he brought forth a physical nation to be His Kingdom, and gave them more and more laws, but they too only rebelled and broke the covenant, and killed their Messiah. It became obvious through all this that the problem was in man, not in the environment. So now He starts a spiritual Kingdom to get people preprared for the final eternal Kingdom. Still, there is sin and imperfection. Men would continue to blame bad environments and governments. So one last step is to give them that perfect government and environment they wanted. This goes all well, but at the end, people still rebel. It is the final lesson about man, to man.
You think that man's sin is
either Satan OR man himself; but it is
both. Anyone following Satan is following their own sin, and anyone driven by their sin is under Satan.
Cite this "actual experience" that proves to you Satan is currently atacking Christians.
The fact that all those scriptures about resisting him and how he puts thoughts into our minds (that did not come from us) are still true for us.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some preterists claim that Satan's presence on eart was marked by demonic possession, which they claimed peaked in the war, but then ended for good in AD70.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I make no such claim, nor have I ever.
Lets stick to the claims I HAVE made, OK?
Well I didn't know whether you did or not, so in case you did; I answered it. (I thought that would be the only way they could prove that Satan was on the earth before AD70, but not after. So how do you prove that then?)
Highly debatable does not equate with proof. Have you "SEEN" a demon posessed person yourself? Who's eyes have you personally looked into where you were 100% certain they were posessed ny demons, with no other possible explaination for their ocular oddities?
I don't have that gift of pereception. Not all do. I am very intellectual; and don't usually pick up those things. But others (including some around me) do; and I cannot dismiss their claims. They even note the difference in the eyes of the Son of Sam when he was first caught, with now; that he has professed Christ.
So, you can't prove it, rather you suspect it.
OK. That's what I thought.
I suspect it in
some people; not all. Some are clearly phony. Not all; though the preterist is forced by his view to say that they all are.
You are either in Christ, or in Adam by your own accountable choice.
The Devil has no power over that decision.
He has no power over those who have made the decision to be in Christ. Can you show where it is ever said that those outside of Christ are now freed from the power of Satan?
Show me the scriptyure that says Satan can not exert influence over individual humans from the lake of fire.
So now you're admitting that he "can" still exert influence over people? Then why argue that people under this "influence" are only "in Adam"; but not in Satan's power? You're not even being consistent here. The lake of fire signifies the total separation of sin and sinners from the presence of God and His saints. Once again; you're in a bind; because you can try to say that this is our protection in Christ now (while the sinners are in the lake of fire with him); but then you have just symbolized away the lake of fire; and with it the doctrine of Hell!
He can't decieve entire nations anymore, as He did in OT times, but I find no scripture that says Satan would one day be prevented from tempting individual sinners.
What are "nations", but large consists of individual sinners?
This obviously cannot be. In Rev. 6:11, martyred saints are told "rest yet for a little season, until their fellow servants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled".