The absurdity and heresy of Preterism
- Thread starter Nehemiah6
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
No, I'm saying that the dead in Christ have already been raised and everyone that has died since that time have put on immortality and have gone into heaven in their glorified bodies. Christians don't die.
So the relevancy to this thread is that there IS NO absurdity and heresy of Preterism. The absurdity and heresy lies within dispensationalism.
So the relevancy to this thread is that there IS NO absurdity and heresy of Preterism. The absurdity and heresy lies within dispensationalism.
-
1
- Show all
The Jews rejected their Messiah the first time around per prophecy but that was part of Gods overarching and immaculate plan for the ages. But the Scripture is resoundingly and profoundly clear that they will be giving given a second opportunity that they will NOT miss! And again this fulfills all prophecy. These prophecies are perfectly clear I really cannot fathom all of this misunderstanding from the preterists and amillennialist. Other than my diagnosis that they do not have indwelt the Holy Spirit. Because nobody is that dumb......it is judicial blindness in my opinion.
-
1
- Show all
I'll have to come back later today (gotta get some work done), but I think I've posted things with you about this... see if this jogs something:
--"caught up TOGETHER with them" where the "together" word is attached to the verb "caught up" (meaning, [caught up together] AT THE SAME TIME);
--2Cor5:1-8, where "unclothed" refers to "being without a body for a time, upon DEATH [of the believer]" [which Paul says he is "WILLING" for, if God so wills it],
whereas "clothed upon" [which we are "earnestly DESIRING" (no one "earnestly DESIRES" to DIE first)] refers to "being immediately clothed upon with our glorified body APART from having to DIE first [this happens at the Rapture point in time, for the "we which are ALIVE and remain unto" (2Cor5:2-4; corresponding to the "THIS MORTAL shall put on immortality" of 1Cor15:51-54 [and "the DEAD IN Christ" corresponds with the "THIS CORRUPTIBLE must put on incorruption"]--before we are "caught up TOGETHER" that is, AT THE SAME TIME, or you could say, "AS ONE" the "ONE BODY," i.e. "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY," which is who Paul is addressing and speaking "to/for/about" in these passages)
Hope this begins to address your question... sorry I can't stay... BBL (hopefully) = )
--"caught up TOGETHER with them" where the "together" word is attached to the verb "caught up" (meaning, [caught up together] AT THE SAME TIME);
--2Cor5:1-8, where "unclothed" refers to "being without a body for a time, upon DEATH [of the believer]" [which Paul says he is "WILLING" for, if God so wills it],
whereas "clothed upon" [which we are "earnestly DESIRING" (no one "earnestly DESIRES" to DIE first)] refers to "being immediately clothed upon with our glorified body APART from having to DIE first [this happens at the Rapture point in time, for the "we which are ALIVE and remain unto" (2Cor5:2-4; corresponding to the "THIS MORTAL shall put on immortality" of 1Cor15:51-54 [and "the DEAD IN Christ" corresponds with the "THIS CORRUPTIBLE must put on incorruption"]--before we are "caught up TOGETHER" that is, AT THE SAME TIME, or you could say, "AS ONE" the "ONE BODY," i.e. "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY," which is who Paul is addressing and speaking "to/for/about" in these passages)
Hope this begins to address your question... sorry I can't stay... BBL (hopefully) = )
-
2
-
1
- Show all
I have the same problem with having to get stuff done. 
I participate when I can.
"Caught up together WITH THEM" - the them is the Old Testament saints that were raised with Christ. When the Lord comes into our lives, we become just like them, IN CHRIST and immortal, but not glorified bodies. We get glorified bodies when we pass from this existence to the next.
Are you saying that we are disembodied spirits while we're in heaven? Why would we not receive the same glorified body that Christ has? Why would we need to wait for it?
I participate when I can.
"Caught up together WITH THEM" - the them is the Old Testament saints that were raised with Christ. When the Lord comes into our lives, we become just like them, IN CHRIST and immortal, but not glorified bodies. We get glorified bodies when we pass from this existence to the next.
Are you saying that we are disembodied spirits while we're in heaven? Why would we not receive the same glorified body that Christ has? Why would we need to wait for it?
By all accounts the so-called dispensationalists utterly crushed and annihilated the preterists and the amillennialists on this thread. A humiliating defeat but not all unexpected, but rather quite inevitable. Frankly the quality and quantity of the posts of the so-called dispensationalists and millennialists was amazing and outstanding.
-
1
- Show all
“Assuming that the prophecy of Agabus was made before Claudius Caesar became Emperor in 41AD, and consequently the latest date for Barnabas to go to Tarsus to get Paul was 40AD, then Peter's vision and his visit to Cornelius could have been at any time between 35 and 40AD. If the assumption regarding Agabus is false, then we have a wider time frame, from 35 to 45AD, but we continue this discussion on the basis that it's true.
Peter's vision was an act of Divine providence, because without it the second generation Believers who began preaching to the Gentiles would have been considered outright heretics. The early Jerusalem Believers never had any thoughts of ministry to the Gentiles, who were totally excluded from the church for at least the first five years until 35AD, and maybe the first ten years until 40AD. After that, the Judaising controversy raged for another 10 or 15 years until it was finally settled in Jerusalem in 50AD. “
This author dates it at no sooner than 5 years and between 5-10 years. That’s considerably later than a few years although “considerably” is vague.
Peter's vision was an act of Divine providence, because without it the second generation Believers who began preaching to the Gentiles would have been considered outright heretics. The early Jerusalem Believers never had any thoughts of ministry to the Gentiles, who were totally excluded from the church for at least the first five years until 35AD, and maybe the first ten years until 40AD. After that, the Judaising controversy raged for another 10 or 15 years until it was finally settled in Jerusalem in 50AD. “
This author dates it at no sooner than 5 years and between 5-10 years. That’s considerably later than a few years although “considerably” is vague.
We move from this existence in spirit/soul but not in the body until the resurrection of our bodies. Only at the rapture does it happen simultaneously.
1 Corinthians 15:51-54 (KJV) Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 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. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 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 appears to happen at the last trump, but according to you the last trump seems to be ongoing...every time a Christian dies.
1 Corinthians 15:51-54 (KJV) Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 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. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 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 appears to happen at the last trump, but according to you the last trump seems to be ongoing...every time a Christian dies.
So is the futurist view with the impossibility of this "3rd temple", A WAY bigger roadblock to that view than ignorance of how the Hebrews wrote apocalyptic literature.
To be honest the "3rd temple" is a MUCH bigger problem for your view than your misunderstanding of the literary style of apocalyptic literature in Rev. is for those of us that believe Jesus already brought judgement on the covenant breakers, at the end of that age. But whatever, act as if your view doesn't have HUGE problems you have to ignore or deny, just to hide behind so you don't have to answer how on earth a 3rd temple is even possible, let alone being logical for a system that points to the coming Messiah to be reinstated, AFTER Jesus already came. The whole 3rd temple idea has so many holes and problems it blows my mind how this thing ever became the mainstream view in the US. Baffling. God in the last days spoke to us through Christ, Paul tells us ANYONE that adds to His word is cursed, yet God has not yet commanded His people to build this Temple. See the conundrum here? There is no 3rd temple, it is a made up lie that must be assumed into the text, yet there is no room for "God's 3rd temple" in History, it is finished as a great man once said.
So can you please address your easily debunked futurist view before acting like you even know what you're talking about with ours? Thanks brother.
To be honest the "3rd temple" is a MUCH bigger problem for your view than your misunderstanding of the literary style of apocalyptic literature in Rev. is for those of us that believe Jesus already brought judgement on the covenant breakers, at the end of that age. But whatever, act as if your view doesn't have HUGE problems you have to ignore or deny, just to hide behind so you don't have to answer how on earth a 3rd temple is even possible, let alone being logical for a system that points to the coming Messiah to be reinstated, AFTER Jesus already came. The whole 3rd temple idea has so many holes and problems it blows my mind how this thing ever became the mainstream view in the US. Baffling. God in the last days spoke to us through Christ, Paul tells us ANYONE that adds to His word is cursed, yet God has not yet commanded His people to build this Temple. See the conundrum here? There is no 3rd temple, it is a made up lie that must be assumed into the text, yet there is no room for "God's 3rd temple" in History, it is finished as a great man once said.
So can you please address your easily debunked futurist view before acting like you even know what you're talking about with ours? Thanks brother.
-
1
- Show all
thanks for the references!
I don't doubt the John was alive in the 90s, or that the book of Revelation was written at about that time.
do you accept everything that irenaeus said as true?
for example, in that same book 3 chapter 3,
"2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops."
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm
I don't doubt the John was alive in the 90s, or that the book of Revelation was written at about that time.
do you accept everything that irenaeus said as true?
for example, in that same book 3 chapter 3,
"2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops."
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm
Well that’s pretty demeaning but I’ll give a civil answer.
Revelation is a deeply Jewish book, perhaps the most Jewish of all. It is the divorce proceedings between God and the faithless harlot Israel. The warnings Moses gave in Leviticus 26 if they were faithless come to pass. After that proceedings, the Kingdom of God no longer resided in political, racial or religious Israel.
The depictions are found in the OT and I’m told nothing new is there but i’ve no time to check this out myself. The language symbolism and metaphors are deeply Jewish with examples in the OT.
So you are wrong.
Revelation is a deeply Jewish book, perhaps the most Jewish of all. It is the divorce proceedings between God and the faithless harlot Israel. The warnings Moses gave in Leviticus 26 if they were faithless come to pass. After that proceedings, the Kingdom of God no longer resided in political, racial or religious Israel.
The depictions are found in the OT and I’m told nothing new is there but i’ve no time to check this out myself. The language symbolism and metaphors are deeply Jewish with examples in the OT.
So you are wrong.