What led me to preterism....

[HankD]

My view apparently wasn't even considered here. This is metaphorical language, of which the Bible is full.

Or do you believe that all of believing Israel will be enjoying eternal life under the shade of their own personal vine and fig tree?

Or do you believe that Satan was bound with a literal chain?

I could go on and on.

Even in the biblical imagery there is a reality behind it, we both know and believe that .

We disagree with that reality when it comes to His Second Coming and now the resurrection of believers (or so it seems).

Israel and the church will exist and be distinct even into the eternal state.

Revelation 21
10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
13 On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.
14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

Jesus said those who “drink” His blood will live forever and it is apparent that this imagery is pointing to faith in the power of His blood to wash away our sins.

He bled real blood on a real cross.

He is the Second Person of a real Trinity.
He was made real flesh in the womb of a real virgin.
He had a real birth, lived a real life, died a real death.
He was buried in a real tomb.
He had a real resurrection and came forth with a real flesh and bone body.
He ate real food with His real apostles.
He ascended to heaven in the real body.
This same Jesus will return “in like manner” in that real flesh and bone body.

Every eye will see Him.

I will be provided with a real flesh and bone body like His because I will see Him as He is and I will be like Him.


HankD

 

[thomas15]

Once I realized the Apostles taught and believed Christ would return in their generation and they were the ones inspired by the Holy Spirit then it became obviously that Preterism was the only way to go. I don’t understand how people can think they are more inspired than the Holy Spirit.

Once I learned to view prophecy through the Preterist model all the prophecy and other scriptures harmonized and made sense like never before.

Well then just kick back and bask in the knowledge that you are smarter than the average bear.

 

[asterisktom]

Even in the biblical imagery there is a reality behind it, we both know and believe that .

We disagree with that reality when it comes to His Second Coming and now the resurrection of believers (or so it seems).

Israel and the church will exist and be distinct even into the eternal state.

Yes, I strenuously disagree here. Christ died so that His own could be one. You want them to be separate - to all eternity. To hold onto this belief you would have to discount three major passages from Paul alone, let alone the rest of scripture.

Revelation 21
10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
13 On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.
14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

Jesus said those who “drink” His blood will live forever and it is apparent that this imagery is pointing to faith in the power of His blood to wash away our sins.

To be more exact, it is not just that but actively participating in Christ, being partakers (as Peter says) of the divine nature. His grace that teaches us also strengthens us.

He bled real blood on a real cross.

He is the Second Person of a real Trinity.
He was made real flesh in the womb of a real virgin.
He had a real birth, lived a real life, died a real death.
He was buried in a real tomb.
He had a real resurrection and came forth with a real flesh and bone body.
He ate real food with His real apostles.
He ascended to heaven in the real body.

Agreed to all of of this, with the "flesh and bone" to include blood.

This same Jesus will return “in like manner” in that real flesh and bone body.

See, now you are adding to what is actually stated. The "like manner" will be in His coming in a cloud. This is the unifying detail found in all those other Second Coming passages I had quoted elsewhere here in BB. "Like manner" describes how, not what.

Every eye will see Him.

I see your point. Actually, I disagree. I just used my "see" to point out other uses of the word. Did Nathanael actually "see" angels ascending and descending on the Son of Man"?

 

[asterisktom]

Well then just kick back and bask in the knowledge that you are smarter than the average bear.

And you are the one that (correctly) faulted my attitude when writing.

 

[Winman]

Your belief is apparently very similar to Winman's, belief in a flesh-and-bones resurrection body has its own set of serious problems. Please see my posts to Winman on this. Posts 86 and 91.

Why is a flesh and bones resurrection body a problem? What do we see in Ezekiel 37? What part of the body is not mentioned?

Eze 37:1 The hand of the LORD was upon me, and carried me out in the spirit of the LORD, and set me down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones,
2 And caused me to pass by them round about: and, behold, there were very many in the open valley; and, lo, they were very dry.
3 And he said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord GOD, thou knowest.
4 Again he said unto me, Prophesy upon these bones, and say unto them, O ye dry bones, hear the word of the LORD.
5 Thus saith the Lord GOD unto these bones; Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live:
6 And I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live; and ye shall know that I am the LORD.
7 So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone.
8 And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them.
9 Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.
10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.
11 Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts.
12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.
13 And ye shall know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,
14 And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the LORD have spoken it, and performed it, saith the LORD.

Are bones mentioned in this vision of resurrection? Yes.

Is flesh mentioned in this vision of resurrection? Yes.

Is blood mentioned in this resurrection? NO.

Did God forget to mention blood?

 

[asterisktom]

Why is a flesh and bones resurrection body a problem? What do we see in Ezekiel 37? What part of the body is not mentioned?

Eze 37:1 The hand of the LORD was upon me, and carried me out in the spirit of the LORD, and set me down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones,
2 And caused me to pass by them round about: and, behold, there were very many in the open valley; and, lo, they were very dry.
3 And he said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord GOD, thou knowest.
4 Again he said unto me, Prophesy upon these bones, and say unto them, O ye dry bones, hear the word of the LORD.
5 Thus saith the Lord GOD unto these bones; Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live:
6 And I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live; and ye shall know that I am the LORD.
7 So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone.
8 And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them.
9 Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.
10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.
11 Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts.
12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.
13 And ye shall know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,
14 And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the LORD have spoken it, and performed it, saith the LORD.

Are bones mentioned in this vision of resurrection? Yes.

Is flesh mentioned in this vision of resurrection? Yes.

Is blood mentioned in this resurrection? NO.

Did God forget to mention blood?

You hit upon a capital idea right here, Winman:

"What part of the body is not mentioned?"

Oh wait. I see something here. There is no mention of heads!

According to this passage, we will have no heads in the resurrection. "Heads" are not at all mentioned so, given the Winman hermeneutic, we have just unearthed another important clue.

No blood.
No heads.

Who knows what else we will find?

:tonofbricks:

 

[Winman]

How could they breathe without heads? It says the breath came "into them" in verse 10. As far as I know, air only enters us through either our nose or mouth, both of which are on the head.

 

[asterisktom]

How could they breathe without heads? It says the breath came "into them" in verse 10. As far as I know, air only enters us through either our nose or mouth, both of which are on the head.

Good.

Now use that same logic for flesh and blood.

 

[Winman]

Good.

Now use that same logic for flesh and blood.

All I know is that in Ezekiel 37 when Ezekiel saw a vision of the future bodily resurrection of Israel that God mentioned flesh and bones but did not mention blood, and when Jesus showed himself to his disciples he said he was flesh and bones.

Hey, some disagree. I asked my pastor what he thought, and he believes we will also have blood in our new resurrection bodies, because he said the life is in the blood.

But he is also familiar with Preterism and said those who hold this view pull this verse out of context. He showed that in the very next two verses it shows our bodies will be "changed" from corruptable to incorruptable.

1 Cor 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

It doesn't say our bodies will be done away with, it says changed or transformed.

Then it speaks of "putting on" incorruption and immortality.

1 Cor 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

This putting on speaks of a body. This is shown in 2nd Corinthians.

2 Cor 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

The earthly house of this tabernacle in verse 1 speaks of our bodies. It is corrupt, it is mortal, and we groan in it, desiring to be clothed with a new house which is from heaven.

Now do you honestly believe our spirit will be clothed with a spirit? Our spirit will be housed in another spirit?

Or rather that this mortal earthly body that our spirit now lives in will receive a new body that is incorruptable and immortal?

 

[thomas15]

And you are the one that (correctly) faulted my attitude when writing.

I don't care about winning the arguement or being correct or impressing anyone on the internet. I'm just a simple, mostly self taught student of the Bible who also dabbles in theology. All I want to hear is the answer to the most basic of questions. And that question is of course, why do covenant theologians (A-mils, Post-mils and Preterists) totally avoid any discussion of the actual terms of the covenants? And the follow-on question, where in the covenants are the forgiveness of sin and eternal life?

 

[asterisktom]

I don't care about winning the arguement or being correct or impressing anyone on the internet. I'm just a simple, mostly self taught student of the Bible who also dabbles in theology.

By saying this you imply a contrast: Those of us who are "covenant" theologians are not simple, self-taught students of the Bible. Oh yes, we get it from universities and those ponderous tomes. CT in your thinking seems to translate to us thinking we are "smarter than the average bear".

Oh well, I guess you have no mirrors in your house.

All I want to hear is the answer to the most basic of questions. And that question is of course, why do covenant theologians (A-mils, Post-mils and Preterists) totally avoid any discussion of the actual terms of the covenants? And the follow-on question, where in the covenants are the forgiveness of sin and eternal life?

BTW, you shouldn't generalize about us all being covenant theologians. Some certainly own up to the term and are comfortable with it. Others (like myself) shy from it. It is not the best way to describe my belief. I don't believe, like many CT do, in a Covenant of Works. I certainly don't believe it extends, like many do, back to Adam. I believe that grace was in both Testaments. Well, this is getting off topic.

 

[thomas15]

By saying this you imply a contrast: Those of us who are "covenant" theologians are not simple, self-taught students of the Bible. Oh yes, we get it from universities and those ponderous tomes. CT in your thinking seems to translate to us thinking we are "smarter than the average bear".

Oh well, I guess you have no mirrors in your house.

What I find amazing is that after repeated requests, you (and others) still cannot or will not answer the question, simple as it is. As far as the mirror comment, my good friend, the reason I have no mirrors is due to the fact that when I look into one, they have a nasty habit of breaking. Same with camera lenses. I can't even keep a pair of plastic eyeglass lenses from cracking. I could never pull off having an avatar like you my friend without risking wide scale internet revulsion.

BTW, you shouldn't generalize about us all being covenant theologians. Some certainly own up to the term and are comfortable with it. Others (like myself) shy from it. It is not the best way to describe my belief. I don't believe, like many CT do, in a Covenant of Works. I certainly don't believe it extends, like many do, back to Adam. I believe that grace was in both Testaments. Well, this is getting off topic.

Satisfy my couriosity and also change the subject by giving me an example of a published preterist writer who is not a covenant theologian. I'll give you credit for not buying into the covenant of works. This is a no brainer since I believe that if Jehovah God wanted us to know about a covenant of works he would have mentioned it in the Bible. Grace, you are also correct, is in both testaments. Who is argueing against you on this point? But while we are still on the subject of the covenants, just where in the covenants does it specify forgivenss of sins and eternal life? I read in a popular book titled Christ of the Covenants all about the mechanics of covenants, Biblical ones and secular ones but hardly a word about the actual terms of the OT covenants. Another book, same thing, this one is titled Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope.

 

[thomas15]

.....Where do Preterists get this idea that the old covenant ended in 70 A.D.? The scriptures show it is yet to be fulfilled in Romans...

Getting back to your post # 75 you ask a very good question. Look at all of the "reformed" white noise that has to be forgotten in order for the preterists to make their case. For example, Dispensationalism, (say the reformed) is new as if preterism is old. And the reformed say that the dispensationalists don't have any historic confessions as if the historic confessions imply that the second coming of Jesus has already happened. There is nothing in church or secular history that backs up the preterist contention that Jesus returned in AD 70. They also have to buck mainstream reformed theologians who date Revelation AD 90-95, in agreement with the dispies.

Winman, you ask a very good question.

 

[HankD]

In the resurrection the life principle is no longer oxygenated blood but the Spirit of God:

1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:​

NKJV 1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,​

Romans 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.​

shall also quicken (make alive) - Future tense.​

1 Corinthians 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.​

Whether blood or no, the life principle in the glory of His shared resurrection is the Spirit of God which lives and abides forever and not mortal blood required to bring oxygen to these mortal cells.​

Personally, I don't believe we will have or need blood and that we will have "flesh and bone" bodies as He has in accord with the promise that "we shall be like Him".​

Certainly that is no problem for God who presumably created angels without blood.​

And what of the several "theophanies" including His appearance to Abraham and Sarah in Genesis 18:8 and even ate and drank with them.​

Not that the incarnation of Jesus Christ was a theophany as were those before His flesh and blood incarnation but to simply prove that there is a life principle which does not depend on mortal blood subject to death.​

HankD​

 

[HankD]

BTW, In that same vein Tom, thomas15 and Winman, I am glad that everyone here involved in this thread is remembering that this is a debate among brethren and are treating each other in the command of our Savior to "love one another".

Blessings to all...

HankD

 

[Winman]

BTW, In that same vein Tom, thomas15 and Winman, I am glad that everyone here involved in this thread is remembering that this is a debate among brethren and are treating each other in the command of our Savior to "love one another".

Blessings to all...

HankD

Thanks Hank, I am not personally upset when someone disagrees with me.

But back to flesh and bone, this morning I was reading Ephesians and what do I see?

Eph 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.

This does not absolutely prove we will not have blood in our resurrected bodies, but it is another verse that mentions Christ's flesh and bones and says nothing whatsoever about his blood.

I simply believe Jesus spilled all his blood at Calvary and then offered it on the mercy seat in heaven for our sins.

 

[webdog]

I think the debate about whether we will have blood or not is interesting and might be a good thread in itself. I tend to believe Adam was created with blood and that is how He intended man to live forever. The inclusion of blood doesn't equate to mortality. I think the thoughts concerning blood in the times the Bible was written was thought of as a scary thing (like the sea) since they did not have the benefits of modern medicine. Any kind of wound could be fatal back then, even a 1 inch laceration.

 

[HankD]

Thanks Hank, I am not personally upset when someone disagrees with me.

But back to flesh and bone, this morning I was reading Ephesians and what do I see?

Eph 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.

This does not absolutely prove we will not have blood in our resurrected bodies, but it is another verse that mentions Christ's flesh and bones and says nothing whatsoever about his blood.

I simply believe Jesus spilled all his blood at Calvary and then offered it on the mercy seat in heaven for our sins.

Indeed:

Hebrews

11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?​

HankD

 

[RAdam]

I get tickled when people debate what the resurrected bodies will be like.

 

[webdog]

I get tickled when people debate what the resurrected bodies will be like.

Mine will be 6 inches taller...I was never able to dunk a basketball...