Hazelelponi
Member
It's not a book promoting heresy. I wouldn't do that. Amillennialism has been the traditional position for the professing Protestant church orthodox. That is the position the book is taking and explaining.
-
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!
Revelation is not about the FUTURE
- Thread starter atpollard
- Start date
It's not a book promoting heresy. I wouldn't do that. Amillennialism has been the traditional position for the professing Protestant church orthodox. That is the position the book is taking and explaining.
Blank
Active Member
I think I answered that in post #118 on my 2nd point...
In the meantime, I do believe God has not abandoned Israel, as seen in Rev 7, nor do I believe God has replaced Israel with the Church. (Now you can put me on 'ignore').
atpollard
Well-Known Member
Have a nice day.
I’ll waste no more time attempting to get you to communicate.
(and I can ignore you without placing you in ignore)
Since the coming of the Church at Pentecost, the Lord has been dealing with Spiritual Israel, but physical Israel not totally forgotten, as much of the Coming earthly Kingdom will revolve around them during Messianic Age
Agree that is became the dominants position after Augustine and others, who pushed that the Church of Rome was that Kingdom upon Earth, but the position held before that seemed to a type of Historical premil
Blank
Active Member
and Historical Premil has been the standard Church view a couple hundred years before Amil. I guess all eschatological views have their debut sometime.
Hazelelponi
Member
and Historical Premil has been the standard Church view a couple hundred years before Amil. I guess all eschatological views have their debut sometime.
I don't think they understood, even though they understood. I think they thought it would be faster.
I would have thought the same thing on that side of the timeline. We can simply see more now.
Blank
Active Member
When it comes to eschatology, I'm not sure anyone understands. Look at Christ's first coming; the majority of Jews missed that one completely. I don't expect much different from Preterists, Dispys, Amillennialists, Postmillennialists, etc.
Along those same lines we might wonder what size God's "nostrils" are, Job. 4:9. Or we can realize that the Bible has much figurative imagery, both in the Old and New Testaments.@asterisktom
Can a "spiritual body" weep? Pretty sure it can't.Tear ducts are physical. Yet in the Bible it says that in Heaven God will "wipe away all tears from their eyes" (Rev. 7:17, 21:4)
I just got my wifi back yesterday, or I would have answered sooner. We are staying with and helping my ailing mother-in-law in Greenville, SC, her husband being in the hospital.
I am quite behind in several correspondences and here as well. But, looking at your above responses (plural) I am not sure if I would make any headway in getting you to come around to a more Biblical understanding. Also, your left-handed insult about me possibly "trying to trick" you doesn't bode well for respectful conversation. I have been nothing but honest with you.
Then what do you do with flesh and blood not entering into the kingdom of God? You still want our future bodies to be physical, yet sans flesh and blood. Don't just follow tradition like the majority of Pharisees and scribes. Read what the Bible actually says.
This is a needlessly cynical outlook, as if to say that correct eschatology is impossible to find, or that no one has come upon it. Let me ask you: DId Paul teach correct eschatology? I hope you would say that he did.
Then the question remains: Did this correct eschatology just disappear with him and the other inspired writers? Did they take that with them to Heaven? Of course not.
I haven't forgotten your other issues with my post, John. I'm just going to whittle away at them as I have time.
By liberal scholar I assume you mean Schaff. There are others. And if you want I can list a few, but it would mean tracking down that file. But I could just turn that assertion of yours around and say that the later date is based on only one ancient writer, Irenaeus, the same writer that made other unbelievable claims. All of the other "experts" were basing their assertions on his original error. I think it is Augustus Strong that made some good comments on this. Once again, I can dig that up too.
Another problem for the later date for Revelation - or for any post AD 70 date for the Bible - is the absolute silence on historical reporting on the fall of Jerusalem. Not a single word.
Hazelelponi
Member
Our Lord and Savior preached the ressurection of our bodies. We don't know what type of body they will be, what it will be like exactly, but from John's description and seeing Christ after His ressurection he still has a human form, even when the vision of Him is fully glorified in station according to His True Status and Nature, He still has a human form.
The multitude, though they look like the angels and are like the angels now in nature, they still have bodies in a human form.
We are indeed created in His image brother, and not our own.
To preach against the ressurection of the dead is to preach against the clear teachings of Scripture and I believe constitutes actual heresy, but I'm not a scholar or a pastor in station or an elder brother to say such a thing...
But I do caution you in Christ to please truly consider this post again in light of Scripture and reason.
The Resurrection Body | Modern Reformation
Christ is risen! He is risen indeed! Alleluia!” This cry will rise from many churches this Easter season as we rejoice in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. On the third day, the grave in which they laid his body was empty. His body had not been stolen’the posting of Roman soldiers...
When we too are ressurected from the dead (Romans 6:4-5) we are given our glorified and incorruptible bodies, and we will be like the angels (in nature, neither marrying nor given in marriage) but higher than them in status. (. ,Matthew 22:30,)
Last edited:
...
I am not preaching against the resurrection of the dead. If there is no resurrection then we have no faith, no hope. I agree that it would be heresy.
But that is not what I wrote. And I caution you, as well, to consider this matter "in light of Scripture and reason". Speaking of which, in my previous comment I alluded to 1 Cor. 15:50:
"Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption."
Please let me know your thoughts on this verse.
Hazelelponi
Member
I agree with that. Where does Scripture teach our glorified bodies to be a corrupt thing,?
The marrying and being given in marriage and having an earthly, fleshly relationship with God is now, later, after we join Christ in His death and Resurrection, we won't have these bodies of flesh, but will be raised incorruptible on the last day
Last edited:
Nowhere. I don't know why you would even ask that? Please answer the part that I bolded.
I agree on not having these bodies of flesh in the afterlife. Our "last day" will be when we die. The "last day" or "last days" in the Bible was always in a Jewish context.
The same physical body God gave to us while on earth, will be raised up in a glorified physical form