|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 12/31/2007 9:05:48 PM
|
|
|
Doorkeeper
Posts: 53
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: parousia70
Your argument is fine, except you offer no evidence for why we should not further apply it to his entire body. Why could it not also have been His choice to first appear in the same body that was crucified? By your argument, He left His wounds intact for evidentiary purposes only.
Clearly appearing in the flesh served that specific purpose as well. We can only speculate as to His motives. Perhaps it will be helpful when He returns to show to the Jews. There are a few Scriptures that hint that it was His intent to do this.
Zec 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for [his] only [son], and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for [his] firstborn.
Isa 49:14 But Zion said, The LORD hath forsaken me, and my Lord hath forgotten me.
Isa 49:15 Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee.
Isa 49:16 Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of [my] hands; thy walls [are] continually before me.
Zec 13:6 And [one] shall say unto him, What [are] these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, [Those] with which I was wounded [in] the house of my friends.
quote:
Simple.
Moses, after appearing at the transfiguration, went back to Sheol, just like Lazarus, after being raised went back after he died again. Neither had been permanently raised out of Sheol/Hades/Abrahams Bosom, (Which is what "resurrection" is) prior to Christ. Neither were in Glorified Bodies, And I submit to you, neither was Jesus' prior to His Ascension in Acts 1. How would you define a Glorified Body? How is it different than a spirit?
quote:
The Body that walked on water was "normal"?
Sorry DK, You'll have to give me something more before I'll buy your notion that the Body that walked on water was somehow incapable of walking through walls. Was there something special about Peter's body? He also walked on water. Besides, the ENTIRE gospel hinges on the humanity of Jesus. His body pre-resurrection was 100% human.
Those ones materializing/dematerializing and ascending into Heaven had only been seen in the Bible by Angelic beings. Some examples:
Jdg 6:19 And Gideon went in, and made ready a kid, and unleavened cakes of an ephah of flour: the flesh he put in a basket, and he put the broth in a pot, and brought [it] out unto him under the oak, and presented [it].
Jdg 6:20 And the angel of God said unto him, Take the flesh and the unleavened cakes, and lay [them] upon this rock, and pour out the broth. And he did so.
Jdg 6:21 Then the angel of the LORD put forth the end of the staff that [was] in his hand, and touched the flesh and the unleavened cakes; and there rose up fire out of the rock, and consumed the flesh and the unleavened cakes. Then the angel of the LORD departed out of his sight.
Jdg 13:19 So Manoah took a kid with a meat offering, and offered [it] upon a rock unto the LORD: and [the angel] did wondrously; and Manoah and his wife looked on.
Jdg 13:20 For it came to pass, when the flame went up toward heaven from off the altar, that the angel of the LORD ascended in the flame of the altar. And Manoah and his wife looked on [it], and fell on their faces to the ground.
This points to Jesus having a Glorfied (non-human) Body after He came from the grave because He both materialized and de-materialized and acendend into Heaven.
quote:
Take a look at some KJV-related Bible translations and how they translate this passage:
And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God (American KJV).
and even after they corrupt my skin, yet this: in my flesh I shall see God (Modern KJV).
And after my skin is destroyed, this [I know,] That in my flesh I shall see God (New KJV).
...
And though after my skin wormes destroy this bodie, yet shall I see God in my flesh (Geneva Bible).
And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God (1833 Webster Bible).
...
And I shall be clothed again with my skin, and in my flesh I shall see my God (1899 Douay-Rheims Bible).
And after my skin hath compassed this body, Then from my flesh I see God (Young’s Literal Translation).
...
And if after my skin this shall be destroyed, yet from out of my flesh shall I see +God (Darby Bible).
Even after my skin has been stripped off my body, I will see God in my own flesh (GOD’S WORD Version).
After my skin is destroyed, then in my flesh shall I see God (Hebrew Names Version).
and after my skin has been struck off from my flesh, yet this, I shall see God (Literal Version)
After my skin is destroyed, Then in my flesh shall I see God (World English Bible).
For I know that he is eternal who is about to deliver me, and to raise up upon the earth my skin that endures these sufferings: for these things have been accomplished to me of the Lord; (LXXE, v. 25 and 26)
My flesh may be destroyed, yet from this body I will see God (Contemporary English Version).
Even after my skin is eaten by disease, while still in this body I will see God (Good News Bible).
And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God (NIV).
“Even after my skin is destroyed, Yet from my flesh I shall see God (NASB).
Doorkeeper, none of these translations indicates that the nature of this destruction is the decay of death; some, in fact, intimate that this destruction occurs during the duration of Job’s physical life (Good News Bible, Contemporary English Version). Thus, it is very possible that the striking off the skin of which this passage speaks is not related to physical death at all. The disease is nature of the destruction. You question if the Scriptures say being skinless is fatal. Do you believe that it is possible for someone to be skinless and still live?
All of the translations mentioned to this point are consistent with and show a physical resurrection of the body as someone who loses their skin will die. Job is still in his body even after he is resurrected, albeit a changed body.
quote:
Finally, some translations even indicate that this seeing of God occurs outside of the flesh, and would seem to intimate that this passage is not teaching a physical resurrection of the flesh:
And after my skin, even this body, is destroyed, Then without my flesh shall I see God (ASV).
And when after my skin this is destroyed, then without my flesh shall I see God (1901 Jewish Publication Society Old Testament).
And, though, after my skin is struck off, this followeth, yet, apart from my flesh, shall I see GOD (Rotheram Bible).
The word translated as “in” in some versions but as “without” and “apart from” in these versions has a wide range of meanings.
Thus, the KJV rendering is not the only one that is grammatically possible. Some translations explore all possible meanings as you see here.
quote:
You see, I can clearly demonstrate the problem with attempting to use this passage to “prove” the resurrection of the flesh body.
Like I said before,
Those translations that are more ambiguous only “prove” a fleshly resurrection in a circular sense: There are quite a few other passages that one can look to...
quote:
The Body that is sown is NOT the body that shall be. The Body that shall be is the Body that "God Gives us" (clothes us in) (1 Cor 15:37-38) We retain our individual identity, but not our fleshly body. I don't think you understood what I'm asking. It is the soul that goes down into Sheol. It is the soul that is raised up. The soul is a spirit. What does is mean to put a on spirit body if the soul is already a spirit?
Plus, why would Paul have to explain at lengths the concept of people living in spirit form after their death? The Greeks at that time believed that people lived on in the realm of the dead. This wouldn't have required an explanation. This verse would not have to be asked:
1Cr 15:35 But some [man] will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
But if there was a physical resurrection, it certainly would. Images of zombies from the dead and rotting flesh would come to mind. But Paul saying that they were spirits moving out of Sheol into Heaven would certainly not need explanation and hold no mystery. People living after death in spirit form was nothing new.
BTW, what does this passage mean?
Jhn 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
Jhn 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
The word "graves" used there means sepulchres or tombs and not Sheol. According to your definitions, there should be nothing coming out of the tombs since the fleshly body is not resurrected.
Likewise, what does this passage mean?
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive [and] remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
If Christ came in 70AD, then were believers "caught up" with them at that time?
Also, this:
Act 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Did Christ come in "like manner" in 70AD?
quote:
Nope, that's why the settled on Body instead of Flesh, because it affirms that there is a Spiritual Body. The Gnostics did not believe in a spiritual Body So when the creeds say that Jesus shall come again to judge the living and the dead, what does that mean? Don't full preterists believe He already came?
_____________________________
Doorkeeper
...I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness... - Psa 84:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 12/31/2007 9:18:59 PM
|
|
|
Doorkeeper
Posts: 53
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FatherKnowsBest
Another point reqarding Job 19:25,26 is the question of what Job was most concerned with at that point. He certainly wasn't concerned about some event far in the future that he didn't even understand, and maybe didn't even know about. His concern was to be justified in the eyes of his accusers by his redeemer. This is confirmed in the verses after this.
Job 19:28,29 If you should say, 'How shall we persecute him?'- Since the root of the matter is found in me, Be afraid of the sword for yourselves; For wrath brings the punishment of the sword, That you may know there is a judgment."
Job wasn't looking to some judgment far in the future, but one in the very near future that would redeem him in the eye's of his persecuters. It simply doesn't make any sense that Job would have spoke about a future resurrection when his concern was with his suffering and those who were accusing him.
Sure it does. In verse 25, he was talking about his redeemer. The one who would redeem his body. The one who would restore him even after his disease. The one he would see with his own eyes. That was his ultimate hope in a seemingly hopeless situation.
The better question to ask is why is he mentioning a redeemer standing on the earth in the latter days if this passage is speaking only of his current suffering?
_____________________________
Doorkeeper
...I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness... - Psa 84:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 1/1/2008 2:49:27 AM
|
|
|
Doorkeeper
Posts: 53
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FatherKnowsBest
Another point reqarding Job 19:25,26 is the question of what Job was most concerned with at that point. He certainly wasn't concerned about some event far in the future that he didn't even understand, and maybe didn't even know about. Read Jude 14-15, Enoch prophesied the coming of Christ in Judgment before the Flood. Job coming after this would have known about it. And given the fact he says "my redeemer", he obviously knew he needed a redeemer therefore he knew that God had a plan for redemption. Coupling this with the certainty that he would see God with his own eyes and he was even excited about it (ver 27) makes this more than just God coming to deal with his present accusers. He was looking for the coming of Christ and his redemption.
BTW, verse 27 rules out any alternative translations that say Job would see God "without" the body: in a spirit or non-physical body. He said that he would see God with his own eyes.
_____________________________
Doorkeeper
...I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness... - Psa 84:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 1/1/2008 3:26:33 AM
|
|
|
Doorkeeper
Posts: 53
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FatherKnowsBest
Has the sting of death been done away with? Most Christians would say that death for a Christian is a good thing, that is, for that particular Christian. He spends paradise with God for eternity. How can that be a bad thing? Death still brings pain. There is the pain of separation, both for those who leave loved ones behind and those who are left behind. There is the pain of unsaved loved ones who die. For those who are working in ministry, there is the prospect of facing the Lord without having completed the work that they are given to do. Though death comes to all, it rarely comes at a convenient time.
quote:
Most Christians would also say that the spirit is more important than the flesh, and those Christians who have died are more alive than we are. With these things in mind, how can there be any sting to death? Even Paul didn't want to leave those he was in relationship with behind (Phil 1:22-24). Anyone who is gung-ho to leave, has very few ties with people, very little ministry work to do, and/or a poor understanding of the purpose of the Church here on earth.
quote:
I once debated a pastor about the resurrection. I asked him if the law was still in effect. He firmly said that all of the law has passed away. I pointed out to him this passage:
1co 15:56 The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law.
He apparently didn't consider this passage because it caught him off guard. It clearly says that the strength of sin is the law. So once the law passed, the strength of sin passed. Clever. Questions for you. Can there be sin in the life of the believer? Can a believer be carnally minded? If the answer to either question is yes, then the the strength of sin has not passed (Rom 6-8). This is the law of sin and death that Paul refers to in these chapters.
If you believe that the strength of sin has passed, try engaging in sinful behaviors for a little while. You will see that the power of sin, the power of the law and the power of death will be "resurrected" in your life... (Rom 6:16-23)
_____________________________
Doorkeeper
...I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness... - Psa 84:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 1/1/2008 6:44:55 PM
|
|
|
FatherKnowsBest
Posts: 69
Joined: 9/10/2005
From: Sandpoint, ID
Status: offline
|
quote:
Sure it does. In verse 25, he was talking about his redeemer. The one who would redeem his body. The one who would restore him even after his disease. The one he would see with his own eyes. That was his ultimate hope in a seemingly hopeless situation.
The better question to ask is why is he mentioning a redeemer standing on the earth in the latter days if this passage is speaking only of his current suffering?
Only a few translations mention "latter days". If we assume that the KJV is accurate with this verse, then you have a case, but look at the NASB:
"As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth."
quote:
Read Jude 14-15, Enoch prophesied the coming of Christ in Judgment before the Flood. Job coming after this would have known about it. And given the fact he says "my redeemer", he obviously knew he needed a redeemer therefore he knew that God had a plan for redemption. Coupling this with the certainty that he would see God with his own eyes and he was even excited about it (ver 27) makes this more than just God coming to deal with his present accusers. He was looking for the coming of Christ and his redemption.
BTW, verse 27 rules out any alternative translations that say Job would see God "without" the body: in a spirit or non-physical body. He said that he would see God with his own eyes.
Considering that Job is the oldest book in the Bible, Job didn't have any scripture at all. How could he understand the events surrounding the coming of the Lord? He may have known about the prophecy of Enoch, but that is no proof that he understood it, or understood the resurrection.
In verse 27 Job is saying that he will see God while he is still alive. God will come and redeem him before he dies.
quote:
Death still brings pain. There is the pain of separation, both for those who leave loved ones behind and those who are left behind. There is the pain of unsaved loved ones who die. For those who are working in ministry, there is the prospect of facing the Lord without having completed the work that they are given to do. Though death comes to all, it rarely comes at a convenient time.
This is it? This is our great hope? Those who are destined for hell will go to hell and no resurrection will bring them out of hell. Our great hope is to be united with God. But this we already have.
quote:
Even Paul didn't want to leave those he was in relationship with behind (Phil 1:22-24). Anyone who is gung-ho to leave, has very few ties with people, very little ministry work to do, and/or a poor understanding of the purpose of the Church here on earth.
Php 1:23 For I am hard pressed between the two, having a desire to depart and be with Christ, which is far better.
quote:
Clever. Questions for you. Can there be sin in the life of the believer? Can a believer be carnally minded? If the answer to either question is yes, then the the strength of sin has not passed (Rom 6-8). This is the law of sin and death that Paul refers to in these chapters.
If you believe that the strength of sin has passed, try engaging in sinful behaviors for a little while. You will see that the power of sin, the power of the law and the power of death will be "resurrected" in your life... (Rom 6:16-23)
Of course there can be sin in a believer. Paul is not referring the the law of sin and death. How can you prove that it is? The burden of proof is on you since Paul never mentions the law of sin and death in 1 Cor. The vast majority of the time and all the time during the last part of 1 Cor., "law" is speaking of the Mosaic law. But let's test it out. The sting of death is sin; and the power of sin is the (law of sin and death). The law of sin and death is simply that death comes from sin. So the power of sin is that death comes from sin. In order to eliminate the power of sin we have to eliminate sin first? Sorry, doesn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 1/2/2008 7:39:38 AM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1760
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
Considering that Job is the oldest book in the Bible, Job didn't have any scripture at all. How could he understand the events surrounding the coming of the Lord? He may have known about the prophecy of Enoch, but that is no proof that he understood it, or understood the resurrection.
In verse 27 Job is saying that he will see God while he is still alive. God will come and redeem him before he dies.
I would be inclined to agree with you but Job refers to his body being consumed by words. We tend to read it as him seeing God AFTER his flesh is consumed by worms, do we not?
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 1/2/2008 11:58:54 AM
|
|
|
Doorkeeper
Posts: 53
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FatherKnowsBest
Only a few translations mention "latter days". If we assume that the KJV is accurate with this verse, then you have a case, but look at the NASB:
"As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth." A redeemer is not the same as a savior or a healer. When someone redeems something, it's like paying a ransom. So saying that God will come to redeem Job out of his current troubles doesn't make sense. Job believed that God caused his troubles. So Job calling God his redeemer is saying that God will come and ransom Job from God.
The truth is still in the verse even if you use the NASB instead of the KJV. Look at the words "at the last". It doesn't say "at last" but "at THE last". The last what? And what does "take His stand on the earth" mean? It doesn't say "stand", it says "take His stand". Stand against whom? The devil? Job's illnesses? God would not need to stand against anything because again from Job's point of view, He was the cause of his trouble. It doesn't fit the interpretation that you are putting forth. The only interpretation that makes sense is that this is referring to the Enoch prophecy that the Lord would come to Earth in judgment. He knew that it would happen in the last days.
quote:
Considering that Job is the oldest book in the Bible, Job didn't have any scripture at all. How could he understand the events surrounding the coming of the Lord? He may have known about the prophecy of Enoch, but that is no proof that he understood it, or understood the resurrection.
In verse 27 Job is saying that he will see God while he is still alive. God will come and redeem him before he dies. The fact that he is speaking of redemption speaks loudly by itself. Redeeming is more than helping someone out. So again for him to look for a redeemer says that he knew that he needed a redeemer. And if he sought God to be a redeemer, then he knew that God had a plan of redemption.
quote:
This is it? This is our great hope? Those who are destined for hell will go to hell and no resurrection will bring them out of hell. Our great hope is to be united with God. But this we already have. Everyone will be resurrected out of hell and the grave to meet Jesus in judgment. The lake of fire is the final resting place for all unbelievers and unrighteous. No one truly in Christ need fear death but that is not to say that death no longer has a sting. The sting of death is ended when no one has to experience it anymore.
I've heard it said that life here on Earth is the only hell that believers will experience and the only Heaven that unbelievers will experience. I would agree with this. Life here could never meet the hope and expectation of truly being united with God.
quote:
Of course there can be sin in a believer. Paul is not referring the the law of sin and death. How can you prove that it is? The burden of proof is on you since Paul never mentions the law of sin and death in 1 Cor. The vast majority of the time and all the time during the last part of 1 Cor., "law" is speaking of the Mosaic law. But let's test it out. The sting of death is sin; and the power of sin is the (law of sin and death). The law of sin and death is simply that death comes from sin. So the power of sin is that death comes from sin. In order to eliminate the power of sin we have to eliminate sin first? Sorry, doesn't work.
Actually you proved my point for me. Sin is not just bad because it breaks God's law, sin is also bad because sin leads to more sin. It develops your appetite for more. The old sin nature is still active in the life of a believer. Feed it and it will get strong and old sinful behaviors and attitudes will come with it. It will cause you to sin more and more. This is the power of sin. Along with receiving Eternal Life when we give our lives to Christ , we must also learn to walk in the Spirit. We learn and choose to do things as God would have us to do. We resist sin and follow Paul's admonition:
Rom 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
Rom 6:13 Neither yield ye your members [as] instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members [as] instruments of righteousness unto God.
Rom 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
But we have to choose to obey God. We have to choose not to sin. And by doing so we loosen sin's grip on us and we are no longer a servant to it's power. That's why to eliminate the power of sin, we must eliminate sin.
_____________________________
Doorkeeper
...I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness... - Psa 84:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 1/2/2008 5:16:08 PM
|
|
|
parousia70
Posts: 163
Joined: 5/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doorkeeper
We can only speculate as to His motives. Perhaps it will be helpful when He returns to show to the Jews.
Which Jews?
The Russian Khazars? Etheopian Converts? Dr. Laura? Whoopie Goldberg?
Todays Jews have no relationship to the pre-desolation Hebrew People, Geneticly, religiously or politically.
That Ship has sailed.
They do not follow the Law of Moses, (AD 70 made that impossible) they practice Talmudic Judiasm and as a religious group, exist outside of ANY covenant relationship with God.
Israel is a name given by God through covenant, not By UN decree.
Israel is:
Jesus and His Jewish Followers, with Gentiles Grafted in.
There is no Israel apart from Christ.
quote:
How would you define a Glorified Body? How is it different than a spirit?
I don't know, but I do know that it's different from a physical Body.
"Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.”(I John 3:2)
Now, if John is saying here that we will be like Jesus in His glorified bodily form, why then did he say, “…it has not yet been revealed what we shall be”?
After all, wasn’t John a witness to the resurrection? If he was talking about the bodily form of the pre-ascension Jesus, wouldn’t He have said, “We have seen what we will be like”? This passage only makes sense if you believe that the bodily form of Jesus was transformed into something that John had not yet seen, so it had to be different from what he had seen.
quote:
Was there something special about Peter's body? He also walked on water. Besides, the ENTIRE gospel hinges on the humanity of Jesus. His body pre-resurrection was 100% human.
I do not deny that the body that Jesus had from birth to death was a physical, mortal, perishable, natural body. It was also that same body that was raised from the grave at the resurrection that Sunday morning. But I believe that at some point after that, His resurrected body was changed into a glorified state.
I'm focusing on the time after His resurrection, but before His ascension. On these occasions, there were times when He was immediately recognized (Matt. 28:9-10; Mark 16:14). At other times He was not (Luke 24:13-31; John 20:14). He says He is “bone and flesh” (Luke 24:39) and He ate food (Luke 24:42-43). Your contention is that this was His Glorified Body, mine is that it was the exact body that was crucified.
quote:
Those ones materializing/dematerializing and ascending into Heaven had only been seen in the Bible by Angelic beings.
Are you forgetting Elijah?
He ascended heaven without a Glorified Body. Fully Human.
quote:
This points to Jesus having a Glorfied (non-human) Body after He came from the grave because He both materialized and de-materialized and acendend into Heaven.
His ability to vanish from sight is interesting, but It's not enough to conclude that this was caused by a change in the nature of His physical body after the resurrection. Before His crucifixion, (as I said before) He was able to walk on water (John 6:19). Note that he was also able to pass through hostile crowds untouched (Luke 4:39-40). What’s the difference?
My conclusion is that I have no reason to doubt that Jesus’ body that went into the grave is the same body that came out of the grave with no appreciable change, not even decay (Acts 2:27).
quote:
I don't think you understood what I'm asking. It is the soul that goes down into Sheol. It is the soul that is raised up. The soul is a spirit. What does is mean to put a on spirit body if the soul is already a spirit?
Plus, why would Paul have to explain at lengths the concept of people living in spirit form after their death? The Greeks at that time believed that people lived on in the realm of the dead. This wouldn't have required an explanation. This verse would not have to be asked:
1Cr 15:35 But some [man] will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
But if there was a physical resurrection, it certainly would. Images of zombies from the dead and rotting flesh would come to mind. But Paul saying that they were spirits moving out of Sheol into Heaven would certainly not need explanation and hold no mystery. People living after death in spirit form was nothing new.
Yet The Sadducees Denied vigorously it.
The entire Bible is built on revealing the spiritual reality by the weaker physical reality; From the Jews, to the Passover, to the animal sacrifices, to the Brass Serpent, to the Rock of flowing water, to the Temple, and on and on.
(Note especially 1 Cor 15:46 -- "The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.")
quote:
BTW, what does this passage mean?
Jhn 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
Jhn 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
The word "graves" used there means sepulchres or tombs and not Sheol. According to your definitions, there should be nothing coming out of the tombs since the fleshly body is not resurrected.
5:28 is a repeat of the same promise of 5:25
They can not be interprated to have different meanings.
"Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live."
What did Jesus mean by "and now is" if this was to take place 2000+ years in the future?
quote:
Likewise, what does this passage mean?
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive [and] remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
If Christ came in 70AD, then were believers "caught up" with them at that time?
No, not at that time, but as the text indicates, After that time. The text does not indicate a simultainous event:
Let's start with the first word in the verses -the word "then." This is the Greek word epeita. Normally, when a sequence of events is described, the simple word eita "then" is used. Eita is best translated as "at that time" or "next". Eita is used to indicate an immediate sequence. We see this in:
John 19:26-27 When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, "Woman, behold your son!" 27 Then (eita)He said to the disciple, "Behold your mother!" And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home.
This is a series of events - one immediately after the other.
But in our text, the Greek word is not eita but epeita, which is essentially the same Greek word with an "epi" prefix. This has the effect of affixing the word "after" to the word "then", and the best translation becomes "after then", "after that", or "after that time",and thereby doesn't include the idea of right after.
Galatians 1:18 Then (epeita) after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days.
In this case, the word "then" involved at least three years later.
Galatians 1:21 Afterward (epeita) I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia.
Paul probably went first to the main seaport, Caesarea, and sailed from there to Tarsus, his birthplace (Acts 9:30). He probably then went from Tarsus, in the region of Cilicia, to Syria. It was a while after he left Jerusalem that he got to Syria and Cilicia.
Galatians 2:1 Then (epeita) after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me.
Epeita here involves fourteen years.
1 Corinthians 15:23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward (epeita) those who are Christ's at His coming.
Epeita here is referring to a period of forty years. The idea is: "what came at some time afterwards, after that time, not at that time."
Now look at 1 Cor 15:5-8:
1 Corinthians 15:5-8 and that He was seen by Cephas, then (eita) by the twelve. 6 After that (epeita) He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. 7 After that (epeita) He was seen by James, then (eita) by all the apostles. 8 Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.
We see in this passage that both eita and epeita are used. In verse 15:5, we see eita, indicating that the twelve (the original apostles) saw Him immediately after Peter did, the same day. In verse 15:6, epeita is used meaning: "after that time", because the 500 didn't see Him until later. Verse 15:7, again uses epeita, meaning that some time after the 500 saw him, He appeared to James. Next, the reference is that immediately after appearing to James, He appeared to all the apostles.
The point is, that the form of the word for "then"used in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 is not the form eita, meaning: "right after", but the epeita, meaning: "after that time."
1 Thessalonians 4:17 Then (after that time) we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.
What would be the point of saying "the dead in Christ will rise first," if the living were to be also caught up and changed at almost the same time? Paul is saying that at the return of Christ the dead in Christ will be resurrected, after that time the living will be "caught up" with them in the clouds at their physical death.
Now, the words "caught up" are the Greek word harpazo, it means: "to snatch away." This is where the word "rapture" comes from. But certainly being "caught up" means something different than a levitation of the physical body from earth up into the atmosphere of the sky. Remember, this being "caught up" happens some time after the second coming.
Harpazo could refer to the body being "caught up" but it could also refer to the Christian being "caught up" without the body. It is used this way in:
2 Corinthians 12:2-4 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago; whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know, God knows; such a one was caught up (harpazo) to the third heaven. 3 And I know such a man; whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows; 4 how he was caught up (harpazo) into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
Paul doesn't know whether the body was involved in this man's "snatching away". The body isn't necessary, then, in the harpazo event, or Paul wouldn't have expressed this uncertainty.
1 Thessalonians 4:17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.
Paul says that those who were alive at the second coming will later be caught up together with the dead who were raised, to meet the Lord in the air.
What does the word "air" mean? Is it in our atmosphere or the air we breath? Ephesians chapter 2 testifies what air means here.
Eph 2:2: "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the AIR, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience."
The word "air" is an another word for heavenly or spiritual realm. Satan was always an opponent of the scheme of redemption, as we can see throughout the Bible. He was the prince of the power of the air. In Rom. 16:20, Paul says that Satan would be crushed "shortly" under theirfeet . Jesus now has taken over that sphere and rules in the "air" with the saints since the destruction of Jerusalem. If that is the same "air" where the saints were to meet, then there is no necessity for us to believe that the rapture was to be in the physical realm.
Paul believed that the Lord would return in his lifetime. He preached strongly about the second coming, the resurrection, and judgement, but he never spoke of a physical "rapture" for living Christians.
It is not the physical body that is raptured. It is the Christian himself who is raptured as he leaves his body behind at physical death and moves into the spiritual realm. The dead believers were resurrected when Christ returned, and all other Christians would be caught up at their physical death.
2 Corinthians 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
The rapture takes place at death, when we leave our earthly house and move into our spiritual house.
In looking at the related passages of what immediately followed the parousia, we find the phrases: "Gather the elect from the four winds" in Matt. 24:31; "Each in his own turn" in 1 Cor. 15:23; "We who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever" in 1 Thessalonians 4:17; and "Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on" in Rev. 14:13. These are all equivalent, and are all applicable for us today. The process of being "snatched" or "caught away from" death and Hades and being "gathered in" straight to heaven began in A.D. 70. The "rapture" deals with a passage to the heavenly realm. All believers are all snatched away when they die. Revelation 11:18 is clear in showing an ongoing condition in the new age that began at A.D. 70 "blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on." This gathering began with the consummation of the kingdom, after the resurrection of the dead saints out of Hades, and continues throughout this age.
The idea of a "physical rapture" is nowhere to be found in the Bible, neither is it taught there. There is no Scriptural support for it. This escapist philosophy is pure fiction. We are not taught to escape reality in the Scripture, but rather to face it knowing that God will work all things out for our good (Romans 8:28-30).
The writer of Hebrews wrote:
Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment,
We won't escape physical death, we all have an appointment with it. But when we do die physically, we are "raptured" into the heavenly realm, "And thus we shall always be with the Lord."
1 Thessalonians 4:18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.
Our hope is not to be snatched physically off the face of the earth prior to our death. Our hope is that when we do die physically, we will be "raptured" into the heavenly realm to forever dwell in the presence of the Lord. "Therefore comfort one another with these words."
quote:
Also, this:
Act 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Did Christ come in "like manner" in 70AD?
In Like manner as He entered Heaven, hidden from the eyes by a cloud (acts 1:9) , Yes.
quote:
So when the creeds say that Jesus shall come again to judge the living and the dead, what does that mean?
It means what it says, but offers no explaination of the time and details. rest assured, When it happens, there'll be no doubt that it is happening. That works for me.
quote:
Don't full preterists believe He already came?
Yep, so do Many partial preterists.
You could call me a full-partial preterist.
I believe the creedal coming and the scriptural coming are seperate and distinct events.
The timing and details of the scriptural coming were revealed to the original audience that it applied to, and came to pass as and when they were fortold to, while the time and details of the creedal coming have not been revealed to men (Deut 29:29)
Now, hows about satisfying my Idle curiosity?
How do you account for Jesus promise to "come as a theif" to the 1st century church at Sardis in Revelation 3?
That was a promise from our Lord to real air breathing, blood pumping, actual human Christians alive at the time they received the leter, written specifically to them.
How many theif's comings are there in scripture?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 1/2/2008 5:33:04 PM
|
|
|
parousia70
Posts: 163
Joined: 5/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doorkeeper
Sin is not just bad because it breaks God's law, sin is also bad because sin leads to more sin. It develops your appetite for more. The old sin nature is still active in the life of a believer. Feed it and it will get strong and old sinful behaviors and attitudes will come with it. It will cause you to sin more and more. This is the power of sin.
According to scripture, the power of Sin is the Law of Moses:
1 Cor 15:56
"The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law."
Romans 5:13
"For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law."
My friend, Sin is powerless. It has no strength.
God no longer uses it as any criteria whatsoever in determining our salvation.
The "Law", which scripture plainly states is the "Strength of Sin" Has been rendered "OBSOLETE!" (Heb 8:13)
There is a new covenant in town. The outcome of our lives is set forth by the rules of the NEW covenant, not the OLD, obsolete one.
Those rules of the new (and better) covenant state that we can either:
"Choose" to remain "In Adam", in which case we are already condemned whether we sin or not,
or
We can "choose" to enter "in Christ" and we are forgiven in spite of our sin.
Sin has been forever abolished as the measuring stick used by God to decide who is worthy.
Sin is Dead. It can no longer prevent ANYONE from salvation.
< Message edited by parousia70 -- 1/2/2008 5:42:11 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 1/4/2008 1:20:16 AM
|
|
|
Doorkeeper
Posts: 53
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: parousia70
Israel is a name given by God through covenant, not By UN decree.
Israel is:
Jesus and His Jewish Followers, with Gentiles Grafted in.
There is no Israel apart from Christ.
Regardless of whether or not you believe that Israel today is, in God's eyes, the Israel of old, God will redeem the historic nation of Israel otherwise Eze 36 is in error:
17 Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman. 18 Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it: 19 And I scattered them among the heathen, and they were dispersed through the countries: according to their way and according to their doings I judged them. 20 And when they entered unto the heathen, whither they went, they profaned my holy name, when they said to them, These are the people of the LORD, and are gone forth out of his land. 21 But I had pity for mine holy name, which the house of Israel had profaned among the heathen, whither they went. 22 Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went. 23 And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes. 24 For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.
This obviously is speaking of the historic Jewish nation, God never scattered the Gentiles like He did the Jews. Before you say that this has been fulfilled, read the next verses:
25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. 26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. 28 And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.
God would gather the Jews and give them clean hearts and a new spirit. The cleansing, the new heart and the new spirit came with Jesus. He said that He would cause them live according to His direction and live in the land that He gave to their fathers (Abraham, Issac, & Jacob). God said that He would provide this not for their own sakes but for His Holy Name.
Before you say that God is referring to the "one new man", read on...
31 Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall lothe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations. 32 Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel. 33 Thus saith the Lord GOD; In the day that I shall have cleansed you from all your iniquities I will also cause you to dwell in the cities, and the wastes shall be builded. 34 And the desolate land shall be tilled, whereas it lay desolate in the sight of all that passed by. 35 And they shall say, This land that was desolate is become like the garden of Eden; and the waste and desolate and ruined cities are become fenced, and are inhabited. 36 Then the heathen that are left round about you shall know that I the LORD build the ruined places, and plant that that was desolate: I the LORD have spoken it, and I will do it.
It again talks about God not doing it for their sakes. This is the same group, mentioned earlier. Notice the passage says that when the cleansing occurs, Israel's cities will be built up. After Jesus came, Israel was destroyed as a Nation. This is an event that hasn't happened yet. Similiarly, it refers the heathen that are left. Left from what? Was there a catastrophe or mass exodus of Gentiles around Israel? Makes perfect sense from a futurist view, this is the time after the tribulaton when Jesus returns to Earth to reign.
There are passages like these throughout the OT that directly refer to the Jews of old and can only be fulfilled by their return to the land that they had originally. God has not turned His back on Israel.
quote:
I don't know, but I do know that it's different from a physical Body.
"Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.”(I John 3:2)
Now, if John is saying here that we will be like Jesus in His glorified bodily form, why then did he say, “…it has not yet been revealed what we shall be”?
After all, wasn’t John a witness to the resurrection? If he was talking about the bodily form of the pre-ascension Jesus, wouldn’t He have said, “We have seen what we will be like”? This passage only makes sense if you believe that the bodily form of Jesus was transformed into something that John had not yet seen, so it had to be different from what he had seen. Sort of an obvious conclusion. Before He ascended, there were times that they recognized Him and times that they didn't recognize Him. So His appearance could change. Also, John was also on the Mount of Transfiguration and saw His Glory shine through His human flesh. Having seen both, he really didn't know what Jesus will look like when He returns as He said "coming in the clouds with great Glory"(Matt 24:30). But He did know however He came, we would be like (similiar) to Him.
quote:
I'm focusing on the time after His resurrection, but before His ascension. On these occasions, there were times when He was immediately recognized (Matt. 28:9-10; Mark 16:14). At other times He was not (Luke 24:13-31; John 20:14). He says He is “bone and flesh” (Luke 24:39) and He ate food (Luke 24:42-43). Your contention is that this was His Glorified Body, mine is that it was the exact body that was crucified. It was the body that was crucified that had been Glorified. Didn't Jacob wrestle with an Angel ( Gen 32:24) and the Angels that visited Abraham and Sodom also ate food (Gen 18:8;19:3). Didn't make the Angels human though. They had special bodies.
quote:
Are you forgetting Elijah?
He ascended heaven without a Glorified Body. Fully Human. Nope. Didn't forget. Remember he was carried into Heaven by a chariot of fire (2 Ki 2:11). No chariot for Jesus.
quote:
His ability to vanish from sight is interesting, but It's not enough to conclude that this was caused by a change in the nature of His physical body after the resurrection. Before His crucifixion, (as I said before) He was able to walk on water (John 6:19). Note that he was also able to pass through hostile crowds untouched (Luke 4:39-40). What’s the difference?
My conclusion is that I have no reason to doubt that Jesus’ body that went into the grave is the same body that came out of the grave with no appreciable change, not even decay (Acts 2:27). It's interesting that you seem to be putting forth both sides of view when talking about Jesus' physical state. You say that there was nothing special about Him on one side, He ate food and He said that He was bone and flesh. Then you say that there had to be something special about Him because He was able to walk on water and pass through crowds. It seems that you have both sides covered so as I put forth proof of how He was changed, you can either say that He had special abilities before or that really isn't a special ability. If you take both sides, I guess you can never be wrong...
quote:
Yet The Sadducees Denied vigorously it.
The entire Bible is built on revealing the spiritual reality by the weaker physical reality; From the Jews, to the Passover, to the animal sacrifices, to the Brass Serpent, to the Rock of flowing water, to the Temple, and on and on.
(Note especially 1 Cor 15:46 -- "The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.")
But the first letter to the Corinthians was to the Corinthians, not the Jews. Regardless of what the Sadducees thought, Paul took the time to explain it to Gentile believers. Spirits changing location did not require an explanation. Yet they asked about the body that people would be resurrected into. All Paul had to do was say, you will be a spirit. But he didn't, he said a Spiritual Body. I did some research on this and repeatedly found reference to a Professor by that name of Robert Gundry. He wrote a notable book (Soma in Biblical Theology) in which he did an exhaustive study on the usage of the Greek word for body, soma. One definitive conclusion he reached was that nowhere in the NT and writings of that day where this word used exclusive from a physical body, except for obvious metaphorical usage (the Body of Christ). He ruled out a non-physical body interpretation of soma. And his studies are considered "landmark" work, quoted in many places. Perhaps you should look him up.
quote:
5:28 is a repeat of the same promise of 5:25
They can not be interprated to have different meanings.
"Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live."
What did Jesus mean by "and now is" if this was to take place 2000+ years in the future? He was speaking of Lazarus whom He would raise from the dead at that time (John 12). Verse 25 speaks of the dead hearing His voice and living, verse 28 expands that to include "all" that were in the graves and specifically mentions resurrection. Again I ask you, what does verse 28 mean in a full preterist context? There isn't anything to be raised out of the tombs, especially when it says He will raise ALL that are there. This verse alone rules out full preterism.
quote:
No, not at that time, but as the text indicates, After that time. The text does not indicate a simultainous event:
Let's start with the first word in the verses -the word "then." This is the Greek word epeita. Normally, when a sequence of events is described, the simple word eita "then" is used. Eita is best translated as "at that time" or "next". So we've gotten to the point where it is necessary to re-translate the Bible? Was there not a Bible version you could find that fit your view? Forgive me, but I don't really take attempts to re-translate seriously. Using multiple and obscure translations of Job 19:26 was as far of a reach as I've seen (the 1901 Jewish Publication Society Old Testament?). But I've seen re-translation to fit a particular view before. The truth is sometimes right in front of you, don't ignore it.
And oh, BTW, Luke 16:7 is an exception to your view. The unjust steward had to talk to his master's debtors quickly before he was put out of the stewardship. There was no delay. So your re-translation is unwarranted. "Then" can be at that time...
quote:
quote:
Also, this:
Act 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Did Christ come in "like manner" in 70AD?
In Like manner as He entered Heaven, hidden from the eyes by a cloud (acts 1:9) , Yes. Did you miss the words "as ye have SEEN Him go into Heaven"? You are saying that the Angel said they didn't see Him. So you will see Him come hidden from view? It's oxymoronic. And it contradicts:
Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they [also] which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
Another problem verse.
quote:
quote:
So when the creeds say that Jesus shall come again to judge the living and the dead, what does that mean?
It means what it says, but offers no explaination of the time and details. rest assured, When it happens, there'll be no doubt that it is happening. That works for me.
quote:
Don't full preterists believe He already came?
Yep, so do Many partial preterists.
You could call me a full-partial preterist.
I believe the creedal coming and the scriptural coming are seperate and distinct events.
The timing and details of the scriptural coming were revealed to the original audience that it applied to, and came to pass as and when they were fortold to, while the time and details of the creedal coming have not been revealed to men (Deut 29:29) ???? How can you make a creedal coming distinct from a Scriptural coming? Those who wrote the creeds used the Scripture to reach their conclusions! Are you saying the writers of the creeds had some kind of special revelation?!? So is there a THIRD hidden coming of Jesus? That view seems to be ripe for falling into the coming deceptions.
A false christ appears claiming to be Jesus come again. When we go to the Scripture to prove him to be false, this view says that all the Scriptural proof has already been fulfilled in 70AD and this is a new hidden creedal coming not referred to by Scripture. Whoa!
I really believe that you should seriously re-think this view.
quote:
How do you account for Jesus promise to "come as a theif" to the 1st century church at Sardis in Revelation 3?
That was a promise from our Lord to real air breathing, blood pumping, actual human Christians alive at the time they received the leter, written specifically to them.
How many theif's comings are there in scripture?
One. I'm aware that many futurists view the seven Churches as being representative of the Churches through the ages. There may be some truth to this but that's not how I typically view them. The letter to the Churches are both to those of His day and also representative of groups within the Body of Christ at the time before His return. You can see that in this verse:
Rev 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;
John wrote to his present AND the future. The Body of Christ today is not uniform. There are segments that are "lukewarm" and there are segments that are in great revivial (China, India, parts of Africa, etc.) The same applied to John's day except that the Church is worldwide and multi-denominational. As there were messages to the Churches in that time, there are messages to the Churches in our day as well; speaking to different geographic and denominational groups.
_____________________________
Doorkeeper
...I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness... - Psa 84:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 1/4/2008 2:22:09 AM
|
|
|
Doorkeeper
Posts: 53
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: parousia70
Sin is Dead. It can no longer prevent ANYONE from salvation.
Your sins will not keep you from receiving salvation. But once you have salvation, it isn't license to sin. There are real consequences to continuing in sin after receiving salvation.
Gal 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
Gal 6:8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
Hbr 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Hbr 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
2Pe 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known [it], to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
To say that sin is powerless in the life of the believer is not accurate. People who choose to sin and turn back to the ways of the world do not have automatic forgiveness. Peter and the writer of Hebrews makes this clear above. We must repent and believe the Gospel.
I am not saying God is still keeping track of every sin we commit and our salvation depends on our ability not to sin. To imply that is what I'm saying is a false alternative, a logical fallacy. Just because He forgives our sins, you cannot say sin has no power (therefore God disregards it as a criteria because we have automatic forgiveness). Neither extreme is correct. For example: we have forgiveness in Christ but people can turn their back on Christ and fall away. We have forgiveness in Christ but there will be those that Christ will deal with for being unprofitable servants. He is coming in Judgment and EVERYONE will be judged. Jesus said:
Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Is this a salvation based on works? No. Good works will not get you into Heaven. But it is also true that salvation must bring repentance. Change from the old way of life to walking in God's ways.
Walking perfectly? Absolutely not! But an imperfect Godly walk is very far from living like the Devil.
I recently heard of someone say that they were a Christian, but not a practising one. They may have confessed Christ at one point but had never learned to walk as the Lord would have them to. Now they are living like an unbeliever. Is sin working in their life? Certainly. Will their sins keep them from Heaven? Absolutely.
_____________________________
Doorkeeper
...I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness... - Psa 84:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: All Preterism All The Time - One Stop Thread - 1/5/2008 12:56:08 PM
|
|
|
parousia70
Posts: 163
Joined: 5/29/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doorkeeper
Regardless of whether or not you believe that Israel today is, in God's eyes, the Israel of old, God will redeem the historic nation of Israel otherwise Eze 36 is in error:
17 Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman. 18 Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it: 19 And I scattered them among the heathen, and they were dispersed through the countries: according to their way and according to their doings I judged them. 20 And when they entered unto the heathen, whither they went, they profaned my holy name, when they said to them, These are the people of the LORD, and are gone forth out of his land. 21 But I had pity for mine holy name, which the house of Israel had profaned among the heathen, whither they went. 22 Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went. 23 And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes. 24 For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.
This obviously is speaking of the historic Jewish nation, God never scattered the Gentiles like He did the Jews....................... There are passages like these throughout the OT that directly refer to the Jews of old and can only be fulfilled by their return to the land that they had originally. God has not turned His back on Israel.
All the prophecies about the dispersion and return of the Jews to their own land were fulfilled at the end the Babylonian Captivity in 457 B.C.
"In all your dwelling places the cities shall be laid waste, and the high places desolate . . . ye shall be scattered among the countries . . . among the nations whither they shall be carried captives . . . all the house of Israel shall remove and go into captivity . . . I will scatter them among the nations" (Ezekiel ch. 6–12).
This was the Diaspora. . . . And now the re-gathering of the Jews to their own land 70 years later:
"For thus saith the Lord, that after 70 years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you . . . and I will turn away your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations . . . and I will bring you again into the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive" (Jeremiah. 29: 10-14).
Not one single verse in the Old Testament, or New, written after the Babylonian Captivity mentions any other dispersion and re-gathering of the Jews.
quote:
quote:
No, not at that time, but as the text indicates, After that time. The text does not indicate a simultainous event:
Let's start with the first word in the verses -the word "then." This is the Greek word epeita. Normally, when a sequence of events is described, the simple word eita "then" is used. Eita is best translated as "at that time" or "next". So we've gotten to the point where it is necessary to re-translate the Bible? Was there not a Bible version you could find that fit your view? Forgive me, but I don't really take attempts to re-translate seriously. Using multiple and obscure translations of Job 19:26 was as far of a reach as I've seen (the 1901 Jewish Publication Society Old Testament?). But I've seen re-translation to fit a particular view before. The truth is sometimes right in front of you, don't ignore it.
If you refuse to play by proper exegetic, hermeneutical rules, we'll never see eye to eye on anything. I'm comparing scripture with scripture, appealing to the original greek & hebrew where there is confusion among translations, and all you can offer is..."if it ain't the KJV, it aint correct"?
I suppose you believe the Greek work "Aion" means "Earth" and not Age, right? Because the KJV translates Aion as "World", it must mean world to you?
C'mon now.......
quote:
quote:
quote:
Also, this:
Act 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Did Christ come in "like manner" in 70AD?
In Like manner as He entered Heaven, hidden from the eyes by a cloud (acts 1:9) , Yes. Did you miss the words "as ye have SEEN Him go into Heaven"? You are saying that the Angel said they didn't see Him. So you will see Him come hidden from view? It's oxymoronic. And it contradicts:
Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they [also] which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
Hardly. It contradicts no such thing.
First of all, Acts 1:9 says quite clearly:
Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight.
Next, I'm gonna do it again, if only for the benefit of our readers, even if you reject proper hermeneutics:
The cloud-coming of Revelation 1:7 that "every eye would see" is shown in Revelation 14:14-20 to be an event that occurs in the heavenly realms. As the passage reveals, Christ's actions and commands in the heavenlies result in various tribulation-period disasters that transpire on earth. Simply put, Revelation 14:14-20 is the cloud-coming that "every eye would see." This is significant, for St. John is not describing the coming of Christ as some visual spectacular with cumulus clouds in the skies overhead, but as the coming of Yahweh himself, making Christ equal with the Father. Jesus promised his apostles that he would return in their lifetimes "in the glory of the Father" (Matt 16:27-28; Lk. 9:26; Matt 24:33-34). Christ's return at AD 67-70 was precisely in the manner and tradition of Yahweh's Old-Testament-era comings. We have countless examples of the Father coming in His great glory during the Old Testamental period (be sure to note the graphic, physical descriptions and explicit "visual" connotations of Yahweh's comings):
[On Jehovah's coming at Mt. Sinai] Jehovah came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them (Deut 33:2; cf. Neh 9:13-15; Hab 3:3-16)
[On Yahweh's coming to Egypt -- early 700s BC] Behold, Yahweh rides on a swift cloud, and comes to Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall tremble at his presence; and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it. I will stir up the Egyptians against the Egyptians (Isaiah 19:1-2)
[On Yahweh's coming during the Maccabean Period] For I have bent Judah for me, I have filled the bow with Ephraim; and I will stir up your sons, Zion, against your sons, Greece, and will make you as the sword of a mighty man. Yahweh shall be seen over them, and his arrow shall go forth as the lightning; and the Lord Yahweh will blow the trumpet, and will go with whirlwinds of the south. Yahweh of Hosts will defend them; and they shall devour, and shall tread down the sling-stones; and they shall drink, and make a noise as through wine; and they shall be filled like bowls, like the corners of the altar. Yahweh their God will save them in that day (Zechariah 9:13-16)
[On Yahweh's coming to Israel for Babylonian Exile - 6th Century BC] Therefore thus says the Lord Yahweh: Because you are turbulent more than the nations that are round about you, and have not walked in my statutes, neither have kept my ordinances, neither have done after the ordinances of the nations that are round about you; therefore thus says the Lord Yahweh: Behold, I, even I, am against you; and I will execute judgments in the midst of you before the eyes of the nations. I will do in you that which I have not done, and whereunto I will not do any more the like, because of all your abominations (Ez 5:7-9)
[On Yahweh's coming to Israel for Babylonian Exile - 6th Century BC] As I live, says the Lord Yahweh, surely with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with wrath poured out, will I be king over you: and I will bring you out from the peoples, and will gather you out of the countries in which you are scattered, with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with wrath poured out; and I will bring you into the wilderness of the peoples, and there will I enter into judgment with you face to face...Hear the word of Yahweh: Thus says the Lord Yahweh, Behold, I will kindle a fire in you, and it shall devour every green tree in you, and every dry tree: the flaming flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from the south to the n | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
