(Jesuit) Preterism versus John 14

thank you -- an this is showing that our marriage to Christ involves not only the spirit but the body, right? Paul is using that point to encourage holiness.

speaking of us as already His own bride doesn't definitively make the snatching away of the bride to the place prepared for her, the marriage consummation and feast a thing of the past tho. in Hebrew culture, a betrothed is considered equivalent to an actually married bride. it was not until Gentile culture was mixed with Jewish in the middle ages that there was any thought of the engagement process being 'reversible' or 'tentative' -- rabbinic law treats the betrothal as only being possible to annul through the same divorce proceedings that a married woman would go through.
so it is a very Jewish thing for Paul, a Jew, to speak of the one he 'betrothed' to Christ ((not 'married' - 2 Cor. 11:2)) as already and truly belonging to Him.

but in that these passages from Ephesians speak of us as being bodily joined with Him, how can that consummation, and subsequent feast, have already taken place when we have not yet received the redemption of our bodies ((Rom. 8:22-25)) which is the consummation of our sanctification -- that sanctification being a process the Hebrew bride completes before the consummation of marriage?

why is the body resurrected and changed?

Did you know what Paul actually said was that he was "willing rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord"? The entire first part of 2 Corinthians 5 is Paul saying that he wanted to be rid of this Earthly body of woe, skip being "naked" and "unclothed" without a body (which a blind man can see is a reference to lying in the grave dead), and go be present with the Lord in his resurrection body...

...but Paul knew that man does not go immediately to heaven at death, for in that same chapter he himself said "we must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ" which is at the last day, not at a person's death, and he also said that Jesus would give him a crown of righteousness "at His appearing", not when he died.

Everyone who believes the doctrine of the immortal soul and consciousness in death ignores the elephant in the room...the part about "naked" and "unclothed" which Paul clearly says is the intermediate state between Earthly dwelling and Heavenly residence.

Are we to believe all the OT righteous dead reside in Abraham's literal bosom? How could they all fit? How big can Abraham's bosom be? A man's bosom is able at best to accommodate one adult, or several children, depending on age. Yet, we're to believe millions of dead saints are there? Impossible. It's symbolism, brother.

I await in anticipation.

John 14:

3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

In this verse, the 'location' of "where I am" is NOT "fixed" by the context of the verse/passage.

It is not "fixed" with regard to the 'time' of where Jesus was when He spoke the words.

It is not "fixed" with regard to the 'where' of the place prepared.

According to the 'Grammar of the Language', the place prepared has absolutely nothing [directly] to do with the 'where' in the phrase "where I am" later in the verse.

What "sets" the 'location' of "where I am" is the conditional circumstance defined by the context of the verse/passage.

....

First, I our Lord Jesus said, "where I am" the Lord of truth meant "where I am". It does not fit your concept so your only, and very transparent, escape is to say that it doesn't mean what it says. I think you'll agree that this was the Serpents ploy with Eve.

Secondly, John 14, if taken literally, and without adding to the Word of God, does not need INTERPRETING. It is a plain statement of the process whereby our Lord Jesus predcits to His disciples how He will go away from them to prepare the many "abodes" (lit. Gk.) that make up the Father's House, and return to put them into a condition that He is already in - an abode of God. This you try to overturn by additons and private interpretation - all uncalled for, and unwarranted.

Third, you are still unable to counter one of my statements without adding to scripture.

Fourth, if you think that my understanding of John 14 is what you say above, you have a massive problem with English. But why did I think you would do otherwise. You add words to change the meaning of scripture. Why would yu not do it with other men's writing? I wonder what you would say if I added words to your answer that were never there and never intended by you? You would be within your right to be incensed. I wonder how the Lord feels when His carefully chosen words are added to?



Claiming "sound exegesis" and then dismissing the "ascending" and "descending" to place our Lord IN heaven is a contradiction. Sound exegesis considers the WHOLE. And using "subjectivity" on my part to annul what I said is not an argument. You have yet to expound that verse in its entirety, despite the requests to do so. Let's leave it at that, and return to John 14. Let us discuss what the Lord said, and what happened shortly after - WITHOUT ADDING. If so, good. If you don't want to give an exegesis on John 14 WITHOUT ADDITIONS, lets move on.

I await in anticipation.

Oddly, we mostly agree .

It is ludicrous to argue "...that where I am, there ye may be also" refers to His geographical location on Earth at the time He spoke these words as the place to where the saints are to be taken to partake of the banquets and mansions...because Jesus plainly states that the location of these things He is to prepare are "In My Father's house...." which is a zillion miles from Earth, right or wrong?

There is no scenario one can concoct to show how Jesus came back in the first century and took the church to these mansions and banquets when we are all still very much here right now in 2020...therefore Jesuit Preterism dies on this hill. It cannot be alementated, conservated, resuscitated, or resurrected. It needs to be cast among the rest of the filth on what Martin Luther referred to as "the Roman dunghill of decretals."

(2Co 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.
(2Co 5:2) For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
(2Co 5:3) If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.

When this earthly house of a believer dies, that tabernacle is dissolved, but we as believers, ARE NOT ever found naked. Believers are clothed upon with the heavenly house.

Naked isn't an intermediate state for the believer, it's the state of a non-believer.

Brother, may I refer you back to my posting # 13. That is what I said. The things you talk about in the above posting are so far removed from what I said that I'm not even sure you read my post.

• The Father's House - a "zillion miles from earth"??? I stated clearly that the Father's House in scripture is five things to which I gave scriptures for
• "Geographical location on earth"? - where does this come from? Read what I said.
• "Banquets and Mansions?" - these are your thoughts. I disagreed with the rendering "Mansions". You are the one who likes to think about mansions and banquets
• "Jesus coming back in the first century to take the Church to Mansions"??? Read what I said in posting # 13.

And you have been invited to give an exegesis on John 14 multiple times - yet you refuse. What kind of debate is this? It looks more like a Crusade to obfuscate. You have yet to address one of my statements from posting # 13 as it stands.

C'mon brother. Let's address John 14 (i) in its entirety, (ii) within context of what SCRIPTURE says the House of God is, and (iii) within the context of the whole Book of John. If you don't want to, let us call it off.

Abraham's bosom is the same place as paradise. Jesus told the thief on the cross that he would be with Jesus this day in paradise. Abraham's bosom was a literal place according to the bible. That was the "old heaven", the place where the OT saints that accepted Christ as their savior went just prior to the death of their earthly bodies.

Paradise is up, not down. It is where the Tree of Life is, which is where the River of Life is, and that River flows from the throne of God...which means Paradise is where the throne of God is...which begs the question: how can Abraham's Bosom be an "old heaven" when Paradise is the same heaven it's always been and always will be? Abraham's Bosom of Comfort is a symbol for the Comforter which comforts His church. It's a parable, brother

Paradise is up, not down. It is where the Tree of Life is, which is where the River of Life is, and that River flows from the throne of God...which means Paradise is where the throne of God is...which begs the question: how can Abraham's Bosom be an "old heaven" when Paradise is the same heaven it's always been and always will be? Abraham's Bosom of Comfort is a symbol for the Comforter which comforts His church. It's a parable, brother

Then why would Paul have to clarify in verse 4 that our groaning is not to be unclothed?

Were believers walking around groaning from their earthly burdens with a misplaced desire to find relief from them in death without a body when, if you are correct, that is both ludicrous and impossible? Are you suggesting being "unclothed" means "lost"? What believer would desire to be LOST as a means of obtain that relief? Can you see how your position which assumes this immediate exchange makes no sense in light of verse 4?

The only explanation of "unclothed" and "naked" that makes sense is what I already said: that Paul is saying our desire is not to die and wait in the grave without a body until the resurrection when we get our new body - as Job so plainly says - but that we would SKIP that part and go straight to be with Jesus.

Paradise is up, not down. It is where the Tree of Life is, which is where the River of Life is, and that River flows from the throne of God...which means Paradise is where the throne of God is...which begs the question: how can Abraham's Bosom be an "old heaven" when Paradise is the same heaven it's always been and always will be? Abraham's Bosom of Comfort is a symbol for the Comforter which comforts His church. It's a parable, brother

The rich man and Lazarus is not a parable.

Also hell was adjacent to paradise.

Can you not see that when Jesus says "I go to prepare a place", this demands that Jesus leave from the place He is speaking (Earth) and travel to another place ("My Father's house") to make the preparations? I just don't see any way around this.

Corban posting # 13 - third-last and second-last paragraph

Now let us recount the events of Christ GOING AWAY and RETURNING. Christ dies and both Matthew 12:40 and Ephesians 4:9 tells us that our Lord DESCENDED to the "heart of the earth". This is again confirmed by Acts Chapter 2 which says that our Lord's soul was not LEFT in Hades (v.27) and that this escape from Hades was by the resurrection (v.31-32). Shortly after this resurrection, our Lord Jesus meets a woman near the tomb and admonished her NOT to touch Him BECAUSE He had "NOT YET ASCENDED to His Father" (Jn.20:17). But that night He appears to His disciples and tells them to "handle and touch Him" (Lk.24:39). That means that our Lord Jesus had died, gone to Hades for three days and nights, RISEN, met the woman at the tomb (who may not touch Him), ASCENDED to the Father and RETURNED (so they could touch Him).

And then, having gone, and come again, as He predicted in John 14, HE BREATHED THE HOLY SPIRIT INTO THE DISCIPLES AND THEY BECAME THE HOUSE OF GOD (Jn.20:22). At "that day" the disciples were , where our Lord Jesus had been in John 14, IN THE FATHER AND THE FATHER IN HIM, AND THAT DAY was resurrection day.

My question is why are the Jesuits a reference point for Christians. I thought the Reformation sorted that out.

My next question is why is the Bible interpreted with human cultural traditions? I thought that the Lord was pretty clear that (i) Jewish traditions did not explain the Word, but "made it of none effect" (Mk.7:13), and (ii) we may not interpret scripture with our private thoughts (2nd Pet.1:20).

But I have another proposal. The Title is a doctrine based on John Chapter 14, and there is some pretty wild conjecture in these few posting up to now. Without addressing any one person, I propose that John Chapter 14 does not teach going to heaven, but how to get God into man. Consider these points.

1. John 20:30-13 tells us of the purpose of all that is written in the book of John. That we may believe in Jesus and HAVE God's divine LIFE.
2. John Chapter 1 introduces the theme of John. Seven things are presented so that God may achieve BETHEL - the House of God
3. John Chapter 2 introduces the Wedding Feast for a Bride who is the house of God - the BODY of Jesus Christ
4. John Chapter 3 introduces how God, a Spirit, makes His home (or House) by coming to dwell in the spirit of man by a New Birth which imparts eternal life

If we interpret scripture privately, the sky is the limit for mischief. But if we interpret scripture using scripture alone, the House of God is SIX things:

1. The Tabernacle of the Wilderness (Ex.25:8 etc.)
2. Solomon’s Temple (1st Ki.6:1 etc.)
3. Zerubbabel’s Temple (Ezr.1:2-5; Jn.2:16)
4. Our Lord Jesus’ physical Body (Jn.2:19-22)
5. The Church (1st Tim.3:15)
6. Our bodies (1st Cor.6:19)

So, to call the Father's House in John 14 Heaven has no scriptural basis. Granted, He dwells there, and has the True tabernacle which Moses and David copied there, but scripture NEVER calls this the "Father's HOUSE". In John 14 our Lord Jesus said that He would go and prepare an "abode" (the word "mansions" in the KJV is not warranted), and that He, "... will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also." (John 14:3). Notice the tense. Our Lord Jesus would go away, and come again, so that His disciples would, IN THAT DAY OF HIS RETURN, be where Jesus was as He spoke John 14:3. And verse 20 tells where the disciples will be "AT THAT DAY"! "At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you." That means that the theme of the Father's House is upheld in this Chapter again and the Father's House is God IN MAN.

Now let us recount the events of Christ GOING AWAY and RETURNING. Christ dies and both Matthew 12:40 and Ephesians 4:9 tells us that our Lord DESCENDED to the "heart of the earth". This is again confirmed by Acts Chapter 2 which says that our Lord's soul was not LEFT in Hades (v.27) and that this escape from Hades was by the resurrection (v.31-32). Shortly after this resurrection, our Lord Jesus meets a woman near the tomb and admonished her NOT to touch Him BECAUSE He had "NOT YET ASCENDED to His Father" (Jn.20:17). But that night He appears to His disciples and tells them to "handle and touch Him" (Lk.24:39). That means that our Lord Jesus had died, gone to Hades for three days and nights, RISEN, met the woman at the tomb (who may not touch Him), ASCENDED to the Father and RETURNED (so they could touch Him).

And then, having gone, and come again, as He predicted in John 14, HE BREATHED THE HOLY SPIRIT INTO THE DISCIPLES AND THEY BECAME THE HOUSE OF GOD (Jn.20:22). At "that day" the disciples were , where our Lord Jesus had been in John 14, IN THE FATHER AND THE FATHER IN HIM, AND THAT DAY was resurrection day.

I propose that John 14 does not address HEAVEN, but the House of God - the Church (1st Tim.3:15). I am aware that this myth of going to a "mansion" in heaven is a cherished one. I am aware that many Priests and Pastors have used it as comfort at a funeral service, and I am aware that going to heaven at death is a widespread belief. But the facts of scripture NEVER address dead men going to heaven, and NEVER addresses heaven as the final destiny of men. John 14 was a prophecy about the THREE DAYS starting with Christ's death, where He "prepared" a place that was inaccessible because of sin, and came back to His disciples and made them the House of God.

"What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?" (1st Corinthians 6:19)