Reasons for the 2nd Coming of Christ

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 1830 Pacific/0230 GMT

 

[TCassidy]

No, I will keep posting. John's continued comments, and yours, give me plenty of incentive.

Good for you!

Lord-wiling I will try to avoid the same insults.

I'm sure you will do much better in the future. (Without being a futurist, of course!)

 

[agedman]

Where in Scriptures was the physical body of Christ laid?

Was it not in a borrowed tomb?

In 70 AD, where was the body laid?

???

Christ cannot return without His body. He could not be risen as the first fruits without His body.

One of the great events yet to happen is the great 2nd coming of the Lord Jesus Christ in that body.

What hope have believers, if it is not in the resurrection and return of Christ?

If there is no first fruit, can there be a return for later fruit?

 

[Yeshua1]

Was He a different Jesus in the Old Testament, when Isaiah saw His glory? Just what is involved in "sameness"? Think about these things.

We shall be like Him, John said. You are trying to make Him like us.

That was the pre incarnated Christ though, and God the Son assumed human body and human nature forever more after His birth as Jesus!

 

[Yeshua1]

Where in Scriptures was the physical body of Christ laid?

Was it not in a borrowed tomb?

In 70 AD, where was the body laid?

???

Christ cannot return without His body. He could not be risen as the first fruits without His body.

One of the great events yet to happen is the great 2nd coming of the Lord Jesus Christ in that body.

What hope have believers, if it is not in the resurrection and return of Christ?

If there is no first fruit, can there be a return for later fruit?

The angels said that the same Jesus would one day return, and He will have a real body on him!

 

[prophecy70]

From this whole thing, I don't understand why it matters this much either if Jesus has a physical body today or not. I believe he does, but I don't see how that conflicts with preterism. I don't see AD 70 as a literal or spiritual coming. It was judgment.

I do not think its the same body he left with, its changed. And i'm not sure if he's limited to it, he is still God. But either way I do not see it conflicting with anything either way. No one is denying the incarnation, or the resurrection.

As for the "second coming". Right now i'm leaning towards a future one. But I do not disagree with Tom, until I hear his argument.

 

[agedman]

From this whole thing, I don't understand why it matters this much either if Jesus has a physical body today or not. I believe he does, but I don't see how that conflicts with preterism. I don't see AD 70 as a literal or spiritual coming. It was judgment.

I do not think its the same body he left with, its changed. And i'm not sure if he's limited to it, he is still God. But either way I do not see it conflicting with anything either way. No one is denying the incarnation, or the resurrection.

As for the "second coming". Right now i'm leaning towards a future one. But I do not disagree with Tom, until I hear his argument.

It is one of the holding views stated by preterist on the B.B.

The incarnation (not that milk in a can) is vital.

The resurrection body of Christ was flesh and bone.

Christ is the “first fruits” of the resurrection. He had a literal body. He ate, was touched, was still scarred, and that same body was taken to the Father.

It is impossible for Christ to be with His body, just as believers will one day find It impossible to be without their own eternal body.

 

[asterisktom]

The last we hear from Jesus about His body is a denial that He was a bodiless spirit, and an affirmation that He had "flesh and bones" (Luke 24:39). Since at last word Jesus claimed a physical body, it is up to you to prove when He abandoned that physical body. But you cannot do that, since there is absolutely no Scripture claiming what you say..

Arguing from silence.

1.You say He has now "flesh and bones" (Right? Tell me if I am putting words in your mouth.)
2. "Flesh and blood cannot enter into the Kingdom of God".
3. Do the math. Where does that leave Christ now - according to your worldly logic?

 

[asterisktom]

I stand with the Apostle John, who fled the baths when he heard Cerinthus was there, lest God's judgment fall on him as well as Cerinthus, who was a Gnostic and denied the physical body of Christ. John was as orthodox as anyone in all of church history, but believed in a physical Jesus.

And then, brother, you said I had a really thin skin.

After being basically consigned to Hell by you (not to mention your miscasting me as agnostic) I did not answer back in unkind.

 

[agedman]

Arguing from silence.

1.You say He has now "flesh and bones" (Right? Tell me if I am putting words in your mouth.)
2. "Flesh and blood cannot enter into the Kingdom of God".
3. Do the math. Where does that leave Christ now - according to your worldly logic?

What happened to the blood of Christ?

Was His flesh made of sin such as humankind is born in Adam?

The blood was shed on the cross.

Christ was the Son of God, not born as a son of Adam. He “bore our sorrows” but was not made of sorrows. He “was found in the likenesses of man” but was not conceived in the likeness of man.

Perhaps this will give you a bit of light on the path of understanding the physical aspects of Christ.

 

[agedman]

And then, brother, you said I had a really thin skin.

After being basically consigned to Hell by you (not to mention your miscasting me as agnostic) I did not answer back in unkind.

Are we all not expressing exasperation at times as a thread becomes contentious?

We all push back against personal attacks, and the better are able to move past it and keep the balance.

 

[prophecy70]

What happened to the blood of Christ?

Was His flesh made of sin such as humankind is born in Adam?

The blood was shed on the cross.

Christ was the Son of God, not born as a son of Adam. He “bore our sorrows” but was not made of sorrows. He “was found in the likenesses of man” but was not conceived in the likeness of man.

Perhaps this will give you a bit of light on the path of understanding the physical aspects of Christ.

So you believe he was bloodless after he was resurrected?

 

[prophecy70]

It is one of the holding views stated by preterist on the B.B.

The incarnation (not that milk in a can) is vital.

The resurrection body of Christ was flesh and bone.

Christ is the “first fruits” of the resurrection. He had a literal body. He ate, was touched, was still scarred, and that same body was taken to the Father.

It is impossible for Christ to be with His body, just as believers will one day find It impossible to be without their own eternal body.

Sorry but I do not understand the meaning of this post.
Why do you people add more to what we actually say?

 

[agedman]

So you believe he was bloodless after he was resurrected?

Certainly.

 

[agedman]

Sorry but I do not understand the meaning of this post.
Why do you people add more to what we actually say?

Because, again, the preterist view Christ returned in 70AD but in spirit, not in flesh.

That is impossible. Christ being the “first fruit” of the resurrection could never be divided from His body, any more than believers at the resurrection can never be separated from their new bodies.

Note: Christ did not need a new body because of the conception was by the Father, not by Adam. The believers are given a heavenly body “born from above” when the flesh of Adam is done away.

Paul says, “It does not appear what we shall be, but we shall be like Him...”

All that enter the new heaven and earth are of celestial, and not earthy.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Arguing from silence.

1.You say He has now "flesh and bones" (Right? Tell me if I am putting words in your mouth.)
2. "Flesh and blood cannot enter into the Kingdom of God".
3. Do the math. Where does that leave Christ now - according to your worldly logic?

It is your worldly logic.
Do you deny that Christ's resurrection body was 'flesh and bones'? Was He lying? Did Luke misunderstand Him or mis-hear Him?
In 1 Corinthians 15:50, Paul uses the expression 'flesh and blood' to designate the corruptible body of every human being. The old Adamic body must perish to be renewed and transformed into a glorified resurrection body (vs. 42-44). Christ was resurrected in a (surprise, surprise!) resurrection body. It is in that body that He left the earth, and in that same body that He will return at the end of time (Acts 1:11).

And I agree with JoJ. I don't get too excited by Partial Preterism, but Hyper-Preterism is well outside the realm of Christian orthodoxy. It is an error of much the same status as the denial of the Trinity. You have had loads of time to repent of this. I'm not a moderator, but if I were, you would not stay on this board to spread your error another moment.

 

[prophecy70]

Because, again, the preterist view Christ returned in 70AD but in spirit, not in flesh.

Ive read quite a few preterist books and they said Jesus returned in Judgment like in the OT. The same thing as I believe.

 

[prophecy70]

It is an error of much the same status as the denial of the Trinity. You have had loads of time to repent of this. I'm not a moderator, but if I were, you would not stay on this board to spread your error another moment.

You are in serious error to say this is something he needs to repent of. That is pretty harsh judgement. Just because he does not hold your views, to blast him like this in an open forum is utterly disgusting. If this views are so wrong, scripturally show him how it is.

 

[John of Japan]

After being basically consigned to Hell by you (not to mention your miscasting me as agnostic) I did not answer back in unkind.

I never consigned you to Hell or miscast you as agnostic. Why are you making this stuff up?

 

[John of Japan]

Arguing from silence.

1.You say He has now "flesh and bones" (Right? Tell me if I am putting words in your mouth.)
2. "Flesh and blood cannot enter into the Kingdom of God".
3. Do the math. Where does that leave Christ now - according to your worldly logic?

A person's soul and spirit inherit the Kingdom of God, not his earthly body. Then we receive a new body. How is that hard to understand?

As for "flesh and bones" putting words into my mouth, it's Scripture. Do you deny that? So when did Christ cease being "flesh and bones? You refuse to answer. You can't answer, though I asked you this quite awhile ago on this thread.

And your accusation of "worldly logic" is a false attack. You have a habit of sticking offensive labels on whatever you disagree with. And now you have made false accusations in regard to my characterizations of you. I suggest repentance.