The sign of the son of man

[canadyjd]

My friend, it's only after 77 years of Bible study that the intent of Jesus has given me justifiable reason for the time to "know the end is near".

I don't know what that is suppose to mean. Your sentence is fragmented.

Are you saying you have studied the intent of the sayings of Jesus in Matt. for 77 years and that study has given you "justifiable reason" to know the "end is near"?

His words concerning the unknown day is not meant for us today at all. They are directed to believers who know His coming must be imminent.

I want to make certain I understand you. Even though Jesus said several times that the time of His coming is unknown to everyone except the Father, you have figured it out and are revealing it to us now?

Therefore, all believers can just ignore the sayings of Jesus concerning His 2nd coming until May, 2033, because those believers that are alive at that time are the ones Jesus was speaking to?

Your interpretation ignores the plain meaning of the text, imho, and negates the repeated warnings of our Lord to remain prepared for His coming at all times.

Amos reveals the moon will turn "blood-red" at noon-time in Israel. Astrophysics & computer technology prove it occurs here at 5 AM. Isaiah reveals the sun will darken at "sunrise" and it will in America.....Hosea could point to 2033 because it will be "2 days" after Christ died!...There will be a total Lunar eclipse on the first day of the Feast of Tabs!!...No one knows yet...the 1260-day Endtime will prepare for the last day!!!

Brother, with all respect for you and your long study, it is simply far fetched to believe Isaiah's prophecy is somehow refering to people in America viewing an eclipse at sunrise that Jews view at noon in Israel.

There is nothing in the text that supports that conclusion.

peace to youraying:

 

[lastday]

Lastday

Candyjd,
Thanks for the challenge regarding the context for expecting Christ's SC.

Are you saying you have studied the intent of the sayings of Jesus in Matt. for 77 years and that study
has given you "justifiable reason" to know the "end is near"? [That should be to know "WHEN the end is near"].

I mean that only by extrapolation regarding fulfilled signs of the unknown Day...which Jesus applied to those "who will see all these things happening" at the End of Time ...will Believers "KNOW He is about to appear in glory! It occurs 3 or 4 days "after He has come in POWER through the 2 Prophets"!! They alone will anticipate that Day in advance because of what the Mighty Angel and Voice from heaven revealed...that they will experience "in 3 to 4 days after completing God's Mystery" prior to the Feast of Tabernacles!!!

Preterists refuse to acknowledge the last Day climaxes the 1260 Endtime days rather than AD 70! For even the Jews, "blinded until the fullness and times of the Gentiles are finished", will be among those who "see all these things happening and beg to escape and to stand before the Son of Man"!! It is impossible for this to happen before the Day of the Lord Signs...the Day to
include both the SIGN of His Parousia and HOUR of His coming (Erchomai)!!!

John the Apostle clearly proves that Jesus is still "coming in the flesh" (both by a present and perfect participle) and that too can only occur for those who witness the Signs of that Day as well as the Sign of His Presence like lightning and then to His Coming to "gather the elect"! Believers will be watching with baited breath, not even taking time to bathe lest He appears and they are seen naked!! Rev.16:15. We extrapolate, from the fulfillment of this context alone, the fact that we too cannot know the Day/Hour of His APPEARANCE in advance!! But the final Believers can know the Day of the Signs because it is written in the stars as well as in the prophecy of Daniel... just as Jesus indicated the "Day of of His Visitation", the Day of His Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, could have been determined in advance!!! Luke 19:41-44.

So His words concerning the unknown day are not directly applicable to us today. They are intended for Believers when they know His coming must be at any moment! "Even though Jesus said several times that the time of His coming is unknown to everyone except the Father", He meant it could only then be revealed by the Signs being fulfilled!! We must put ourselves in
their shoes rather than limit the text to AD 70 as proposed by Preterists!!!

Therefore, all believers can just ignore the sayings of Jesus concerning His 2nd coming until May, 2033, because those believers that are alive at that time are the ones Jesus was speaking to?

No one will know for sure whether 2033 is the year unless the 2 Prophets
arrive on the last day of the Passover Week of Unleavened Bread; they will be killed exactly 1260 days later...after 180 weeks...on the final Wednesday before Saturday! In that year, the Feast of Tabs begins on Saturday...3 days after the Prophets finish demonstrating "God's Kingdom Power"!! But Jews will not know if He will APPEAR on Saturday or during the Twilight Hour on Sunday!!!

Your interpretation ignores the plain meaning of the text, imho, and negates the repeated warnings of our Lord to remain prepared for His coming at all times.

We remain prepared because we don't want Him to be "ashamed of us at His coming"! We can't expect to see the Signs until we know the End is Near; but only as the sun turns dark at noon in Israel and Americans see a "blood- red" moon and sun turn dark at early morning does the actual event occur!! Hosea may point to 2033 because it would be "two days" after Christ died!!!

There will be a total Lunar eclipse on the first day of the Feast of Tabs! No one knows yet...for only the 1260-day Endtime will pinpoint the last day!! Brother, with mutual respect, I am convinced, just as God used Joseph to prepare for survival of His people, He wants those suffering great tribulation to prepare and hope for survival and 2033 does meet the signs required!!!
Mel

 

[lastday]

Lastday

RAdam,
Quote:
On August 24, Post #6, you wrote the following:
The purpose of Christ's words is pretty clear: God will not tell us when the
Lord Jesus is coming back. Instead, He wants us to be always watching.
In Post #8 I responded:
Quote:
AMEN!
The purpose of Christ's cautioning words is to avoid setting the "day or hour"!
The reason is realizing that Israel's time changes as of their twilight Hour!!
They won't know if Christ's appearance is before or during that Hour!!!

I assumed that your words: "when Christ is coming" meant the same thing as not knowing the "day or hour"! I stuck with "day/hour" as the crux of your thoughts instead of asking what you meant by "when Christ is coming"
I answered candyjd about the time for the Rapture as follows:
Quote:
I know many identify the Elect as Jews. My objection to that is "the Jews are those who 'mourn' and are 'left behind' and who will be 'rescued' from death and from God's wrath"...during the Hour of Trial which, I think categorically, must be limited to exactly ONE HOUR of the "Day that comes like a thief on all mankind on all the face of all the earth"...a Day that ends at "twilight as the Lord comes with the Saints". Luke 21:35-36; Zech.14:5-9; I Thess.3:13. My objection to making the Elect refer to the Jews is that this "gathering happens on the Day Christ appears". On that Day Jesus promised to "raise up every/all believer(s)". John 6:38-40,44,54.
Please note that men will "see the sign of the Son of Man before they 'mourn'"
and before the Son of Man sends the angels to "gather the Elect upon the 4 winds", as Paul puts it, "unto the Synagogue unto our Lord Jesus in the sky".
RAdam still pressed me about claiming to know the day and hour:
Quote:
No man or woman can know the time of the coming of our Lord. It will be a thief in the night and we are to be in a state of watchfullness at all times.
That is a quick answer that overlooks the much stronger reason for being patient while many are being martyred. Those who are "watching" as of Rev.16:15 know
for certain the "Day and Hour" are imminent. Today we are "waiting" for His coming...until the signs in heaven show His coming must occur at "any moment"!

Pre-Tribbers have no basis to expect that Day apart from "signs causing men to faint from fear at what is coming suddenly, like a snare. It will be an Hour of Trial on all inhabitants on all the face of all the earth". The expectation of the Hour for our "rapture and rewards" awaits the Sign of the Son of Man!!

On that Day, 100 verses in Revelation will be fulfilled as the Jews realize the Son of Man is coming to redeem them (Luke 21:28) and to restore their earthly Kingdom. Luke 21:31. They will be jealous at seeing us coming with the Son of Man. Preterists eliminate the hope of both Christians and Jews from ever taking place in the future by denying we are coming in the flesh!!!
Mel

 

[asterisktom]

Preterists eliminate the hope of both Christians and Jews from ever taking place in the future by denying we are coming in the flesh!!!
Mel

God is Spirit. Those who worship Him must do so in spirit and in truth.

Assuming your believe those first three words, and assuming that we will be like Him, how can Preterists "eliminate the hope" when they are actually emphasizing what Scripture itself emphasizes: That God is essentially spirit?

(Hmm. Are you going to postulate "flesh-and-bones Father and Holy Spirit too, so the Trinity can be more uniform for eternity?)

God is spiritual and spirit.
The Kingdom is spiritual.
The Christian is spiritual.
The eternal things, per Paul in 2 Cor., are also the invisible things.

Flesh and blood cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.

Until I came here to BB I had never heard the response that I hear (from at least three of you now) that "flesh-and-blood is different than flesh-and-bones. It would be funny if it wasn't just so sad.

The lengths that people go when they don't like the answer on the page.

 

[lastday]

Lastday

Winman and HankD,
Preterists explain that "waiting for the adoption of our bodies", i.e., "the redemption of our bodies" refers to the New
Covenant by which we became members of the Body of Christ. Rom.8:23. But Paul speaks of this as "our hope".

In God's mind we have already been "glorified" - edoxasen - aorist indicative - past tense. The hope that our bodies of flesh will be glorified must continue as long as we "groan within these bodies of flesh...while waiting for the adoption
and the manifestation of the sons of God"!

I think I see why Asterisktom could be sucked into Preterism since he had not known what we know before he met you guys on BB. We believe in the resurrection of a
body of flesh, without blood, because Jesus referred to His resurrected body of flesh that was "seen and was touchable". And we know ours also will be "without blood because flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God". It seems impossible for him to accept or even dispute these facts!!
Asterisktom wrote:

Until I came here to BB I had never heard the response that I hear (from at least three of you now) that "flesh-and-blood is different than flesh-and- bones.
It would be funny if it wasn't just so sad.

Friends, my father, a Wesleyan Methodist minister, taught me at the age of
10, 80 years ago, that I could "know I had eternal life because of Romans
8:23-30 where, in God's sight, those who are justified are also glorified with the certain hope of receiving the "adoption...the redemption of our bodies". It
is difficult for me to understand how a learned expositor of Scripture hadn't
heard that "flesh and blood is different than flesh-and-bones". Do you have
any idea of how his explanation of the lack of knowledge makes any sense?!!!
Mel

 

[HankD]

Winman and HankD,
Preterists explain that "waiting for the adoption of our bodies", i.e., "the redemption of our bodies" refers to the New
Covenant by which we became members of the Body of Christ. Rom.8:23. But Paul speaks of this as "our hope".

In God's mind we have already been "glorified" - edoxasen - aorist indicative - past tense. The hope that our bodies of flesh will be glorified must continue as long as we "groan within these bodies of flesh...while waiting for the adoption
and the manifestation of the sons of God"!

I think I see why Asterisktom could be sucked into Preterism since he had not known what we know before he met you guys on BB. We believe in the resurrection of a
body of flesh, without blood, because Jesus referred to His resurrected body of flesh that was "seen and was touchable". And we know ours also will be "without blood because flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God". It seems impossible for him to accept or even dispute these facts!!
Asterisktom wrote:


Friends, my father, a Wesleyan Methodist minister, taught me at the age of
10, 80 years ago, that I could "know I had eternal life because of Romans
8:23-30 where, in God's sight, those who are justified are also glorified with the certain hope of receiving the "adoption...the redemption of our bodies". It
is difficult for me to understand how a learned expositor of Scripture hadn't
heard that "flesh and blood is different than flesh-and-bones". Do you have
any idea of how his explanation of the lack of knowledge makes any sense?!!!
Mel

It's probably not a "lack of knowledge", he suspects and I think it will turn to knowledge.

And no Tom; only the Second Person of the Trinity was incarnated, born of a woman.

We are human beings and have bodies.

As a man, Jesus has a body, as God (The Logos, He is spirit).

HankD

 

[asterisktom]

It's probably not a "lack of knowledge", he suspects and I think it will turn to knowledge.

And no Tom; only the Second Person of the Trinity was incarnated, born of a woman.

We are human beings and have bodies.

As a man, Jesus has a body, as God (The Logos, He is spirit).

HankD

I never denied we have bodies and will have bodies.

Please learn to read my posts for what they actually say.

 

[asterisktom]

It is difficult for me to understand how a learned expositor of Scripture hadn't heard that "flesh and blood is different than flesh-and-bones". Do you have any idea of how his explanation of the lack of knowledge makes any sense?!!!
Mel

Mel's evasion of 1 Cor. 15:50 makes perfect sense to me.

Rather, I can see his reason for evading that verse and trying ever so hard to make it say anything else than what it forthrightly says: Flesh and blood cannot enter the kingdom.

 

[HankD]

I never denied we have bodies and will have bodies.

Please learn to read my posts for what they actually say.

I know, I was providing support for my response to your statement

(Hmm. Are you going to postulate "flesh-and-bones Father and Holy Spirit too, so the Trinity can be more uniform for eternity?)

No - because:

1) We are human.
2) We have bodies.
3) Christ as God is spirit but became human and in His incarnation had/has a body.

My point being that his incarnation applies only to Him and not the Father or the Holy Spirit.

I do however believe we disagree as to the details of the nature of our resurrected bodies.

But I am not sure as I have never seen a response to my questions concerning John 6 and the "last day" of which Christ speaks which admittedly you may not have read.

HankD

 

[asterisktom]

I do however believe we disagree as to the details of the nature of our resurrected bodies.

But I am not sure as I have never seen a response to my questions concerning John 6 and the "last day" of which Christ speaks which admittedly you may not have read.

HankD

Is that in this thread? If not, can you direct me to it please? I didn't see it.

 

[lastday]

Lastday

HankD,
Have you noticed, whenever he wants to evade/avoid a direct remark, Tom Riggle subtily sidesteps the issue. He could have tried to explain what he
thinks Jesus meant by promising to "raise up all believers on the last day"!

The same is true about his not having "heard" about the difference between
a resurrected body of "flesh and bones" and one that has no blood. He jumps
to Paul's reference about a body of "flesh/blood not inheriting the kingdom" without dealing with Jesus' resurrected body of "flesh and bones" which He
stated was "seeable and touchable". I repeat I can't understand his never
having heard about the difference between a body of "flesh/blood" and one of "flesh/bones". The meaning has been clear to me since I was a child of ten.
I think I see why Asterisktom could be sucked into Preterism since he had not known what we know before he met you guys on BB. We believe in the resurrection of a
body of flesh, without blood, because Jesus referred to His resurrected body of flesh that was "seen and was touchable". And we know ours also will be "without blood because flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God". It seems impossible for him to accept or even dispute these facts!!
Asterisktom wrote:

Until I came here to BB I had never heard the response that I hear (from at least three of you now) that "flesh-and-blood is different than flesh-and- bones.
It would be funny if it wasn't just so sad.

Mel

 

[HankD]

HankD,
Have you noticed, whenever he wants to evade/avoid a direct remark, Tom Riggle subtily sidesteps the issue. He could have tried to explain what he
thinks Jesus meant by promising to "raise up all believers on the last day"!

The same is true about his not having "heard" about the difference between
a resurrected body of "flesh and bones" and one that has no blood. He jumps
to Paul's reference about a body of "flesh/blood not inheriting the kingdom" without dealing with Jesus' resurrected body of "flesh and bones" which He
stated was "seeable and touchable". I repeat I can't understand his never
having heard about the difference between a body of "flesh/blood" and one of "flesh/bones". The meaning has been clear to me since I was a child of ten.
I think I see why Asterisktom could be sucked into Preterism since he had not known what we know before he met you guys on BB. We believe in the resurrection of a
body of flesh, without blood, because Jesus referred to His resurrected body of flesh that was "seen and was touchable". And we know ours also will be "without blood because flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God". It seems impossible for him to accept or even dispute these facts!!
Asterisktom wrote:

Mel

Yes, Tom has his flaws, but I can't help but to really like him, but I don't want to swell his head.

He might begin to look like me.

I don't know if you watch TV at all but he has a striking resemblance to Hugh Laurie (House) who is always being verbally assaulted and beaten up with insults by his peers (though he usually deserves it).

I guess I admire his tenacity for one thing.

HankD

 

[HankD]

Is that in this thread? If not, can you direct me to it please? I didn't see it.

OK let me follow my line of reason and repeat the questions concerning John 6.


John 6

39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven.
42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?
43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves.
44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.​

at the last day - en te eschate hamera "en" - on, in, at but never after.

Since full preterism sees all things as having been fullfilled then the "last day" presumably happened in AD70.

Question: What material (or even immaterial) component of the believers body did Jesus raise up on the "last Day" in AD70?

Question: Since all is fulfilled what of all other believers who came after the "last day" what hope did they have.
What hope do we as 21st century believers have of a resurrection seeing that the "last Day" has come and gone?

Thanks
HankD

 

[lastday]

Lastday

HankD,
Brilliant:

Question: Since all is fulfilled (according to full Preterism) what of
all other believers who came after the "last day"? What hope did they have? What hope do we as 21st century believers have of a resurrection seeing that the "last Day" has come and gone?

This is brilliant since it applies to Pre-Tribbers as well as Preterists
The "last day" requires the bodily, physical glorification of every believer...in the likeness and image of Christ who is "coming in the flesh".

At the signs of this "last day", believers still don't know if Jesus will APPEAR on a Saturday or Sunday...should it occur during the Feast of Tabernacles in the year 2033/5794! At the "sign of the Son of Man", on the "last day", no
one will know whether Jesus will APPEAR before or during the Twilight Hour!!
Even the Remnant of unsaved Jews who read about their Messiah coming on that Day will see the Two Prophets arising from death and ascending above to heaven...before Jesus APPEARS...and not know if it is the "last day"!!!

At the first sound of the 7th Trumpet "on that day", Christ is crowned as King. At the second sound, "God will bring the souls of all the dead in Christ with Jesus...and He will gather the elect from the earth". At the third sound,
Jesus will "send the angels to gather us out of the sky's 4 winds from all the extremities above the globe...to meet Him at the "Synagogue in the sky"!

The Doctrine of Christ, according to the Apostle John, requires the belief that He is "coming in the flesh" and, according to Paul, requires that it is the fulfillment of our "hope, the Adoption at the resurrection of all the
Saints also coming in the flesh with Jesus
...for all the Saints are coming with Jesus at His PRESENCE"!!

To deny this Doctrine of Christ, John says, spreads the "spirit of anti-christ"!!!
Mel

 

[lastday]

Lastday

My Most Important Post in Concert with Winman and HankD:

Winman and HankD,

We are a trio holding quite exactly to the same point of view as far as I see.
I too have wondered if the Gog and Magog invaders in Ezekiel and Rev.20 might both refer to the rebellion under Satan at the end of the Millennium. There are two important factors that seem to clash under this possible interpretation.
Note two ideas that stand out for a prior fulfillment in the Ezekiel account:
ONE:
Prior to the invasion of the nations into Israel, Israel does'nt Know the Lord
TWO:
"Thus will I magnify myself, and sanctify myself; and I will be known in the eyes of many nations, and they shall know that I am the LORD. Ezek.38:23.
And the house of Israel will know I am the Lord their God FROM THAT DAY
ONWARD. And the nations will know the house of Israel went into exile for their iniquity...and I HID MY FACE FROM THEM..." Ezek.39:22-24.

Why would it take 1000 years to convince the nations that God is the God of Israel? Will the nations NOT know this during the entire Millennial period??
Again, isn't the purpose for God's destruction of Gog and Magog first of all that ISRAEL herself might "know He is their God AFTER hiding His face from both Ephraim and Judah for 2000 years???

Brethren, I believe there will be two periods of so-called Mideast "peace" prior to the SC...one to convince Israel and the nations that God controls the outcome of their attempted destruction of Israel!

The first period of peace may be engineered by Mystery Babylon the Great which will "reign over the kings of earth for a short time" prior to the 70th 7. The movement to establish Mystery Babylon may itself involve ten years!!

Not only Israel, but her enemies, must be forced to realize Jehovah is on the side of Israel. Even the Jihadists need to be convinced that it is better to work from within the Harlot System like a Trojan Horse before they can hope to invade Israel after destroying the city of Babylon in "one hour with fire"!!!

I think we may have two new adherents to our view with Thomas15 saying
that the Covenant with Ephraim and Israel will be fulfilled 1000 years BEFORE
the "eternal" Davidic Covenant goes into effect at the end of the Millennium!

Thomas15 is suggesting that the New Covenant with the houses of Israel and Judah (Heb.8:8) is not "eternal" and therefore is not the same as the
Davidic Covenant for Israel and all the nations after the Millennium. For the Kingdom of David the word "eternal" occurs 4 times in Ezek.37:25-26!!

But the purpose of the New Covenant is that "all men, as well as Israel, might know the Lord...from the least to the greatest". Israel does NOT yet
know about this "New Covenant". They don't know the Old Covenant is "about to vanish". Heb.8:11-13; Jer.31:34!!!

Only at the start of the Millennium will God fulfill His promise to "remember their sins no more"! The promise that they will "know the Lord from that time onward"
requires that they realize He is about to restore them as "His People"!! That fact, AND the war of God and Magog, must apply to the start of the Millennial rule
of Israel over the nations...not to the Eternal State
under which the Davidic Covenant will go into effect!!!

It is during the Eternal State that the "Kings of the nations will bring their honor and glory into the New Jerusalem! And they will be healed by the leaves of the Tree of Life"...a condition that will exist even during the Millennium!! For 1000 years the nations must worship annually in the Jerusalem on earth or forfeit the rain they need for their crops!!!

"This will be the punishment of Egypt and of all the nations who do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Booths...of Tabernacles...of the Ingathering".
Rev.21:24-26; Rev.22:2,14. Ezek.47:12. Zech.14:16-19.
Mel

 

[asterisktom]

Yes, Tom has his flaws, but I can't help but to really like him, but I don't want to swell his head.

He might begin to look like me.

I don't know if you watch TV at all but he has a striking resemblance to Hugh Laurie (House) who is always being verbally assaulted and beaten up with insults by his peers (though he usually deserves it).

I guess I admire his tenacity for one thing.

HankD

Hank, you made me laugh. Thanks, brother. It was good - honestly.

Also, to be honest still, I struggle with trying to be cordial and gentle in my responses. God knows - and more than a few of you know - that I have spectacularly failed at times.

One of the reasons why I post here (just one) is that I want others to give my beliefs some good vigorous whacks. I need to find the faults in my presentations. This really is a wonderful venue for that regimen.

The fact that we don't agree as to just what these faults are doesn't mean that we can't appreciate those greater, unifying blessings we have in Christ.

 

[HankD]

Hank, you made me laugh. Thanks, brother. It was good - honestly.

Also, to be honest still, I struggle with trying to be cordial and gentle in my responses. God knows - and more than a few of you know - that I have spectacularly failed at times.

One of the reasons why I post here (just one) is that I want others to give my beliefs some good vigorous whacks. I need to find the faults in my presentations. This really is a wonderful venue for that regimen.

The fact that we don't agree as to just what these faults are doesn't mean that we can't appreciate those greater, unifying blessings we have in Christ.

Amen brother.

HankD

 

[HankD]

My Most Important Post in Concert with Winman and HankD:

Winman and HankD,

We are a trio holding quite exactly to the same point of view as far as I see.
I too have wondered if the Gog and Magog invaders in Ezekiel and Rev.20 might both refer to the rebellion under Satan at the end of the Millennium. There are two important factors that seem to clash under this possible interpretation.
...

Mel

I believe that possibly somewhere along the way in the Book of Revelation the inhabited earth comes to the realization that Jehovah, the God of Israel is the true and the living God.

But they throw in with the antichrist and/or satan himself in rebellion against God and receive the mark of the beast.

Revelation 12

4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.​

then fallen humanity itself

Revelation 16

9 And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.
10 And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain,
11 And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.
...
21 And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven, every stone about the weight of a talent: and men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail; for the plague thereof was exceeding great.​

they do not deny Him or that He is the God of Israel or deny His power, they seem to know full well who He is but directly blaspheme Him to His face with knowledge of what they are doing as the antichrist and satan.​

HankD​

 

[lastday]

Lastday

HankD,
Your point is good and insightful:

They (the wicked) do not deny Him or that He is the God of Israel or deny His power, they seem to know full well
who He is but directly blaspheme Him to His face with knowledge of what they are doing as the antichrist and satan.

I believe the "knowledge of what they are doing" depends on a more subtle maneuver than that of a direct assault upon Israel prior to Satan's expulsion from
heaven and the consequent empowering of the Beast and False Prophet.

The enemies of Israel will work within the Harlot System centered at Rome,
IMO, until they find the opportunity to both undermine and confiscate the Network System before they "destroy the City in One Hour with Fire".

But first their enemies must be forced to realize that God is protecting Israel until He is ready to manifest His Kingdom Power through the Two Prophets from
heaven. This change in the method of operation by God and Satan will coincide with the war in heaven when Michael casts Satan from heaven to "make war
against the Jews in His anger and then continue against Christians in his wrath".
Rev.12:7 to Rev.13:18.
Mel

 

[Logos1]

Since full preterism sees all things as having been fullfilled then the "last day" presumably happened in AD70.

Question: What material (or even immaterial) component of the believers body did Jesus raise up on the "last Day" in AD70?

The problem here is the way "last day" is interpreted. It's not the end of time. The bible doesn't say time is ending. The term "last day" should be viewed from the Jewish perspective it was written from--the last day or last days of the Old Covenant. Not end times or last days of Christianity.

Question: Since all is fulfilled what of all other believers who came after the "last day" what hope did they have.

Not the end of time--last day or end of Old Covenant. All who come afterwards simply accept Christ and live under the New Covenant. Under grace not the law.

What hope do we as 21st century believers have of a resurrection seeing that the "last Day" has come and gone?

We are fortunate that now instead of going to Sheol when we die and waiting for Christ to do his work of atonement we don't experience sin death or separation from God. Upon death we are resurrected immediately into his presence in heaven.


Also, I agree with HankD's comments from days gone by that most of us in here believe the same things in regards to salvation and Christianity in general we just differ on eschatology.

And, like Tom I think one of the main benefits for a forum like this is to allow others to try my beliefs and test them and see if they can find problems in my beliefs. I once was a dispensational premillennialist of the first order so a good argument can sway me, but so far I have found nothing but confirmation of my belief in full preterism. I feel so much more comfortable with how the bible comes together now and reinforces itself through out.

“Your understanding of the inspiration of Scripture is utterly astounding!” Mel

Why thank you Mel!