Koester in his book "Revelation and the End of All Things" presents a "timeless" or "ideal" perspective on the book of Revelation by contrasting two cities. One city is the city of God which is "the New Jerusalem" which is contrasted with the harlot city "Babylon." This city "Babylon" I believe is classified in Gal 4. as a symbol of the Jerusalem from below. I differ from hyper-preterism as defining the city "Babylon" as 1ST CENTURY Jerusalem which was destroyed by the Romans in 70AD . By making the book of Revelation about a historical moment in time, I believe they make the judgment on the harlot city a past historical event rather than a symbol of a present reality for those standing in the outer courts, or outside of Christ. The fact is, we are ALL called to flee "or come out" of that wicked harlot "Babylon" (18:4) or "that present Jerusalem." Hyper-Preterism would see fleeing "Babylon" as simply instructions pertaining to that first century Christians in Jerusalem which I believe to be very narrow and restricting view. No one will deny "people fled Jerusalem" to Pella but to fail to look beyond the past to the imagery of the present is inexcusable and misleading. I believe this call to "flee" or "come out" is far more powerful if the book is not simply a book about the past but represents the present situation to come out of the world. The book of Revelation still speaks and still reveals Jesus Christ. It presents a reality and warning to those living within that harlot city and gives assurance and hope to those who have taken refuge in Jesus Christ.
Craig R. Koester. Revelation and the End of All Things. 2001.
"Revelation addresses readers who are pulled in two directions, toward faithfulness and unfaithfulness. Accordingly, John wrote what might be called a "Tale of Two Cities," because he identifies faithfulness with the holy city and unfaithfulness with the harlot city. . . . They vision of the holy city and the vision of the woman both depict the same thing: the situation of the people of God on earth, as they live among powers that seek to overwhelm them and to end their existence as a community of faith." (page 194)
"This dazzling conclusion to John's "Tale of Two Cities" is designed to give readers a reason to pursue the way of faith IN THE PRESENT. The contrasts between Babylon and New Jerusalem, between the harlot and the bride, seek to alienate readers from powers that oppose God, while drawing them more firmly to a vision of life with God. Readers are called away from Babylon (18:4) and toward the New Jerusalem. There will be no reason for the bride and groom to rejoice in Babylon (18:23), but there will be a celebration at the marriage feast of the Lamb in God's city (19:7,9). Babylon will be a dwelling for demons (18:2), but the New Jerusalem will be the dwelling of God (21:3). The harlot may exhibit a splendor that comes from the exploitation of people (19:12-13), but the bride manifests the glory that comes from God (21:11-21). Nations are corrupted when they seek to amass wealth for themselves by trafficking with the harlot, yet God calls the nations to a vision of the bridal city, where they will bring their glory into the presence of God and the Lamb (21:24-26). Babylon is filed with impurity and deception (17:4-5; 18:23), but there is nothing impure or false in the New Jerusalem (21:27). The harlot makes the nations drunk on idolatry and sin (17:2),(18:3), but the bride invites the nations to drink of the water of life and to be healed by the leaves from the tree of life (22:1-5).
Measuring the "temple of God" in Rev. 11:1 does not mean the physical temple was still standing
Many Preterists often use Rev. 11:1 to make the case that the entire book of Revelation was written prior to the destruction of the temple in 70AD. They say that because John is told to go and measure the "temple of God" meaning the physical temple in Jerusalem is still standing when the book was written. While that view may appeal to many who try to make the book of Revelation about historical past events, it does not satisfy my own curiosity for why an an "inanimate object" like the physical temple would be the focus or object of such an amazing prophecy. If it can be shown that the physical temple in Jerusalem was not the object that the angel was told to go and measure, than this particular passage that HyperPreterism uses to date the book completely falls apart because the physical temple was NOT the object of concern. If it was Jesus who was the object "the true temple of God", then using Rev. 11:1 to date the book based on the physical temple still standing becomes insignificant and irrelevant to their argument.
First, the temple of God referred to in Rev. 11:1 was not a inanimate object. Jesus was the "true" temple of God. Jesus was accused in Matthew 26:61 “This man stated, ‘I am able to destroy the "TEMPLE OF GOD" and to rebuild it in three days.’ ” The man who accused Jesus, believed Jesus was referring to the physical temple. However, it is clear that Jesus was referring to himself as being the "true" temple of God. When Jesus was accused of making this statement about destroying the "temple of God", he was referring to his body NOT the physical temple. This is common knowledge among Preterist. Yet, in Revelation 11:1-2, measuring the temple means "the physical temple is still standing" yet in other places in the Bible the temple is known to be Jesus Christ and his body. Preterists want it to be both, and they are certainly NOT consistent in making the claim about Rev. 11:1-2 about the physical temple as a proof text for when the book was written.
Second, the outer courts did not mean the outer court of the physical temple. It did however mean those who were outside of Jesus Christ. Those outside of Jesus are those who were from below, not from above. They where allegorical seen as children of the "bondwoman" and part of those who would remain in the bondage after the flesh resulting in separation from Jesus. (Gal 4). How can anyone possibly think that this applied solely to the first century Jews? Only in a horizontal system like Preterism, can one be so narrow minded to believe the first century Jews represented all of those outside of Jesus Christ.
Third, The metaphor of measuring a city has nothing to do with determining its physical dimensions of the physical temple. It is a symbol of setting all men aside either for preservation or for destruction. It was a symbol of harvest and judgment towards those outside Christ, who stood outside of the "temple of God" and who were given over to death and destruction. It certainly does not mean "physical Roman armies" in 70AD was when all of this occurred. Those outside in the courts outside the temple were of the bondage Hagar and would not be allowed to enter the temple of God, or the Jerusalem from above.
(Revelation 11:1-2) Then there was given me a measuring rod like a staff; and someone said, “Get up and measure the temple of God and the altar, and those who worship in it. “Leave out the court which is outside the temple and do not measure it, for it has been given to the nations; and they will tread under foot the holy city for forty-two months.
Don Preston says "Revelation chapter 11:1-19 depicts the temple (note: Preston applies this to the physical temple) in Jerusalem as still standing. John is told to measure the temple and altar and them that worship therein. (v. 1) "But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months." (v.2) This passage CLEARLY indicates that the temple and city are both in existence at the time of John's writing."
eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=359&Itemid=61
To a Preterist, there is only two options, either you are a Preterist, or you are a Futurist. In their very narrow view, it can only be one or the other. However, both views express a horizontal view that is solely about time, solely external from the real object which is Jesus Christ. Both place the fulfillment in terms of history. I do not believe that the book of Revelation is a mystical message about revealing historical happenings. I can't believe historical events was the mystery hidden since the foundation of the world. I do believe the book of Revelation is laying out higher principles expressed in terms of inclusion and separation from Jesus. It reveals Jesus in such a way that he remains concealed from those outside of him, while opening up and revealing himself to those who are of him throughout ALL GENERATIONS.
First, the temple of God referred to in Rev. 11:1 was not a inanimate object. Jesus was the "true" temple of God. Jesus was accused in Matthew 26:61 “This man stated, ‘I am able to destroy the "TEMPLE OF GOD" and to rebuild it in three days.’ ” The man who accused Jesus, believed Jesus was referring to the physical temple. However, it is clear that Jesus was referring to himself as being the "true" temple of God. When Jesus was accused of making this statement about destroying the "temple of God", he was referring to his body NOT the physical temple. This is common knowledge among Preterist. Yet, in Revelation 11:1-2, measuring the temple means "the physical temple is still standing" yet in other places in the Bible the temple is known to be Jesus Christ and his body. Preterists want it to be both, and they are certainly NOT consistent in making the claim about Rev. 11:1-2 about the physical temple as a proof text for when the book was written.
Second, the outer courts did not mean the outer court of the physical temple. It did however mean those who were outside of Jesus Christ. Those outside of Jesus are those who were from below, not from above. They where allegorical seen as children of the "bondwoman" and part of those who would remain in the bondage after the flesh resulting in separation from Jesus. (Gal 4). How can anyone possibly think that this applied solely to the first century Jews? Only in a horizontal system like Preterism, can one be so narrow minded to believe the first century Jews represented all of those outside of Jesus Christ.
Third, The metaphor of measuring a city has nothing to do with determining its physical dimensions of the physical temple. It is a symbol of setting all men aside either for preservation or for destruction. It was a symbol of harvest and judgment towards those outside Christ, who stood outside of the "temple of God" and who were given over to death and destruction. It certainly does not mean "physical Roman armies" in 70AD was when all of this occurred. Those outside in the courts outside the temple were of the bondage Hagar and would not be allowed to enter the temple of God, or the Jerusalem from above.
(Revelation 11:1-2) Then there was given me a measuring rod like a staff; and someone said, “Get up and measure the temple of God and the altar, and those who worship in it. “Leave out the court which is outside the temple and do not measure it, for it has been given to the nations; and they will tread under foot the holy city for forty-two months.
Don Preston says "Revelation chapter 11:1-19 depicts the temple (note: Preston applies this to the physical temple) in Jerusalem as still standing. John is told to measure the temple and altar and them that worship therein. (v. 1) "But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months." (v.2) This passage CLEARLY indicates that the temple and city are both in existence at the time of John's writing."
eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=359&Itemid=61
To a Preterist, there is only two options, either you are a Preterist, or you are a Futurist. In their very narrow view, it can only be one or the other. However, both views express a horizontal view that is solely about time, solely external from the real object which is Jesus Christ. Both place the fulfillment in terms of history. I do not believe that the book of Revelation is a mystical message about revealing historical happenings. I can't believe historical events was the mystery hidden since the foundation of the world. I do believe the book of Revelation is laying out higher principles expressed in terms of inclusion and separation from Jesus. It reveals Jesus in such a way that he remains concealed from those outside of him, while opening up and revealing himself to those who are of him throughout ALL GENERATIONS.
Translation Issues: We shall (NOT?) All Sleep
David Ewert: A General Introduction to the Bible: From Ancient Tablets to Modern Translations. 1990.
"In 1 Cor 15:51 Codex Vaticanus reads, "We shall NOT ALL SLEEP, but shall all be changed." Codex Sinaiticus reads, "We shall ALL SLEEP, but we shall not all be changed." Codex Bezae has, "We shall all be raised, but we shall not all be changed." The chester Beatty Papyrus reads, "We shall not all sleep, and we shall not all be changed."
http://books.google.com/books?id=RZmcEQDwpbgC&pg=PA160&dq=%22we+shall+all+sleep%22&lr=&ei=ZiqRSL-_ AobujgG1i8XqDw&sig=ACfU3U13fX3RrVrrFGx-oGa_QLWP5zppaA#PPA161,M1
DEMANDED FOR ITS ACCOMPLISHMENT. BUT THE TASK HAD TO BE ABANDONED
George Angier Gordon. Revelation and the Ideal. 1913.
Gordon's Preface "For many years I cherished the audacious dream of writing a book on the philosophy of Revelation. More than ten years of study and reflection ended in the conviction that the task I had set myself DEMANDED FOR ITS ACCOMPLISHMENT the undivided devotion of a long life. THE TASK HAD TO BE ABANDONED; I WAS COMPELLED TO ALLOW THE DREAM TO FADE."
"In plain words, I am convinced that the GREATER INTRODUCTIONS OF GOD TO THE MIND OF MAN ARE THROUGH MAN'S GREATER IDEALS. Moral idealism and Revelation are but the concave and the convex of the same figure."
Gordon's conclusion. "Jesus consummates the despite and the ideal of the ages in his vision of the kingdom of heaven. He beholds a kingdom that has its origin in the will of God, that is supported by the will of God; a kingdom that becomes our sovereign cause opening a way out of selfishness, providing relief and oblivion from wild egoism, calling us to share the glory of the Universal Good; an ideal in whose splendor is gathered the scattered lights of all the earnest centuries, in whose presence we can think our best, achieve our utmost, live at our being's height, and die in heroism and hope."
Gordon's Preface "For many years I cherished the audacious dream of writing a book on the philosophy of Revelation. More than ten years of study and reflection ended in the conviction that the task I had set myself DEMANDED FOR ITS ACCOMPLISHMENT the undivided devotion of a long life. THE TASK HAD TO BE ABANDONED; I WAS COMPELLED TO ALLOW THE DREAM TO FADE."
"In plain words, I am convinced that the GREATER INTRODUCTIONS OF GOD TO THE MIND OF MAN ARE THROUGH MAN'S GREATER IDEALS. Moral idealism and Revelation are but the concave and the convex of the same figure."
Gordon's conclusion. "Jesus consummates the despite and the ideal of the ages in his vision of the kingdom of heaven. He beholds a kingdom that has its origin in the will of God, that is supported by the will of God; a kingdom that becomes our sovereign cause opening a way out of selfishness, providing relief and oblivion from wild egoism, calling us to share the glory of the Universal Good; an ideal in whose splendor is gathered the scattered lights of all the earnest centuries, in whose presence we can think our best, achieve our utmost, live at our being's height, and die in heroism and hope."
"TO PUT AN END TO ALL SIN" IN 70AD? UNIVERSALISM?
This was recently posted by a guy whose screen name is "to put an end to all sinV1
And Jesus came back
and we are a new creation
and that is a fact
and they were the generation
Pre-Chorus
They saw your coming
To put and end, to put an end
to all sin
Chorus
Thou King of the Nations
Ruling over Creation
Righteous and True are you
V2
You rule over man
and Your promises Fullfilled
And Jesus can
Come like the days of Noah
willnotdelay.blogspot.com/2008/07/please-post-your-preterist-lyrics-for.html
And Jesus came back
and we are a new creation
and that is a fact
and they were the generation
Pre-Chorus
They saw your coming
To put and end, to put an end
to all sin
Chorus
Thou King of the Nations
Ruling over Creation
Righteous and True are you
V2
You rule over man
and Your promises Fullfilled
And Jesus can
Come like the days of Noah
willnotdelay.blogspot.com/2008/07/please-post-your-preterist-lyrics-for.html
A 70AD Resurrection is ABSURD
Philemon Robbins Russell. A Series of Letters to a Universalist: In which the Subject of Modern Universalism is examined. 1842.
"The sense which the Universalists (AKA Preterists) put upon the word resurrection in this text is absurd also. You apply the text to the famous destruction of Jerusalem, and tell us that the resurrection then and there experienced, was a "moral and political resurrection," — that " the Jewish nation had long been in a state of moral and political death." Very well. Now, how will this hang together? We will see. What's a moral resurrection? Why, it is obviously, being raised from a death in sin, to a life of holiness. There is no chance for dispute here. Well, now, did the Jewish nation experience such a resurrection at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem ? Look at it. Think it over. Did the Jewish nation, or any considerable portion of them, experience a happy change in their moral characters ? Were they then raised by the Roman army that destroyed their city and temple, or by the gospel, or by any other means, from a life of sin to a life of holiness? With the history of that bloody siege before you, you dare not answer in the affirmative. So far were the Jews from experiencing any moral resurrection, properly so called, at the destruction of Jerusalem, that, according to Josephus, their moral blindness and infatuation were amazing in the highest degree. — They seemed to have been lost to all moral sensibility, and madly plunged into their graves, instead of coming forth from them to a moral resurrection. But you may say to this, that a moral resurrection ' took place at the destruction of Jerusalem, so far as the Christians were concerned. I reply, (I.) The resurrection spoken of in the text is not thus limited. It is applicable to ALL. "All that are in their graves shall hear his voice,"&c. The living saints, at the time Jerusalem was destroyed, were not as a matter of fact, " in their graves." Their bodies were not there. Their souls were not there. They were not morally, nor physically in their graves. Hence they could have had no part in your moral resurrection at the destruction of Jerusalem. ( 3.) The Christians of Jerusalem, who, according to the testimony of one historian who wrote three hundred years after that event, fled to the mountains of Pella, had all of them experienced your "moral resurrection" before the Roman army arrived and commenced the work of human butchery. They experienced their " moral resurrection " when they " passed from death unto life," when they "were raised up and made to sit in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." (page 92-93)
"The sense which the Universalists (AKA Preterists) put upon the word resurrection in this text is absurd also. You apply the text to the famous destruction of Jerusalem, and tell us that the resurrection then and there experienced, was a "moral and political resurrection," — that " the Jewish nation had long been in a state of moral and political death." Very well. Now, how will this hang together? We will see. What's a moral resurrection? Why, it is obviously, being raised from a death in sin, to a life of holiness. There is no chance for dispute here. Well, now, did the Jewish nation experience such a resurrection at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem ? Look at it. Think it over. Did the Jewish nation, or any considerable portion of them, experience a happy change in their moral characters ? Were they then raised by the Roman army that destroyed their city and temple, or by the gospel, or by any other means, from a life of sin to a life of holiness? With the history of that bloody siege before you, you dare not answer in the affirmative. So far were the Jews from experiencing any moral resurrection, properly so called, at the destruction of Jerusalem, that, according to Josephus, their moral blindness and infatuation were amazing in the highest degree. — They seemed to have been lost to all moral sensibility, and madly plunged into their graves, instead of coming forth from them to a moral resurrection. But you may say to this, that a moral resurrection ' took place at the destruction of Jerusalem, so far as the Christians were concerned. I reply, (I.) The resurrection spoken of in the text is not thus limited. It is applicable to ALL. "All that are in their graves shall hear his voice,"&c. The living saints, at the time Jerusalem was destroyed, were not as a matter of fact, " in their graves." Their bodies were not there. Their souls were not there. They were not morally, nor physically in their graves. Hence they could have had no part in your moral resurrection at the destruction of Jerusalem. ( 3.) The Christians of Jerusalem, who, according to the testimony of one historian who wrote three hundred years after that event, fled to the mountains of Pella, had all of them experienced your "moral resurrection" before the Roman army arrived and commenced the work of human butchery. They experienced their " moral resurrection " when they " passed from death unto life," when they "were raised up and made to sit in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." (page 92-93)
Kurt Simmons: Unregenerate men inhabit the new heavens and earth
Kurt Simmons "Those who see only the destruction of Jerusalem and old covenant Israel in II Pet. 3:10 tend to construe the new heavens and earth in the same overly narrow terms. Typically, the new heavens and earth are thought to represent the New Testament. However, this is mistaken. If the new heavens and earth are the New Testament, only those obeying the gospel would dwell there. But this is not the case. Revelation clearly depicts the lost dwelling in the new heavens and earth, outside the city. It is the city that represents the covenantal habitation of the saints; “without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.” (Rev. 22:15) THE FACT that unregenerate men inhabit the new heavens and earth proves conclusively that they are not symbols of the New Testament."
"THE ONLY THING expressly stated to be DIFFERENT about the new heavens and earth from the old is that John saw no more sea, and the new Jerusalem, having come down out of heaven, reigned in its midst. The lack of the sea in the new earth is suggestive of free and unhampered access to the city of God. Seas are natural barriers and served to separate the nations of men. Moreover, in Revelation, the sea represents the Gentiles of the Mediterranean world; the land represented Judea. In the new earth, the distinction between Jew and Gentile is gone. All men are invited into the presence of God within the city (the church); all approach the throne of grace on equal terms. The gates of the city are always open, inviting all to enter and partake of living water and the tree of life – the word of God and gospel of Christ."
eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=345&Itemid=61
The only thing different after 70 AD is ACCESS. No mention of the heavenly kingdom at all. Kurt seems to imply that everything revolves around the earth.
(2 Peter 3:13) But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, IN WHICH RIGHTEOUSNESS DWELLS.
"THE ONLY THING expressly stated to be DIFFERENT about the new heavens and earth from the old is that John saw no more sea, and the new Jerusalem, having come down out of heaven, reigned in its midst. The lack of the sea in the new earth is suggestive of free and unhampered access to the city of God. Seas are natural barriers and served to separate the nations of men. Moreover, in Revelation, the sea represents the Gentiles of the Mediterranean world; the land represented Judea. In the new earth, the distinction between Jew and Gentile is gone. All men are invited into the presence of God within the city (the church); all approach the throne of grace on equal terms. The gates of the city are always open, inviting all to enter and partake of living water and the tree of life – the word of God and gospel of Christ."
eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=345&Itemid=61
The only thing different after 70 AD is ACCESS. No mention of the heavenly kingdom at all. Kurt seems to imply that everything revolves around the earth.
(2 Peter 3:13) But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, IN WHICH RIGHTEOUSNESS DWELLS.
The Beast of Revelation is not NERO. It is MANKIND
Article: What is the White Throne Judgment?
Mike Vinson "What is the beast? That's mankind! . . . Ecclesiastes 3:18 says "Ecclesiastes 3:18 I said to God concerning the estate of the sons of man that he would manifest to them that they themselves are beasts."
Man is the beast, "Revelation 13:18 says Here is wisdom ..., let him that hath wisdom count the number of the beast for it is the number of mankind ..."
There's no article there. The a is not there. It is not the number of a man; it is the number of mankind. What is mankind? He's a beast! This is his number 666."
iswasandwillbe.com/white_throne.php
Mike Vinson "What is the beast? That's mankind! . . . Ecclesiastes 3:18 says "Ecclesiastes 3:18 I said to God concerning the estate of the sons of man that he would manifest to them that they themselves are beasts."
Man is the beast, "Revelation 13:18 says Here is wisdom ..., let him that hath wisdom count the number of the beast for it is the number of mankind ..."
There's no article there. The a is not there. It is not the number of a man; it is the number of mankind. What is mankind? He's a beast! This is his number 666."
iswasandwillbe.com/white_throne.php
How 70 AD results in a DIFFERENT CHRISTIANITY
The first known Hyper-Preterist positions were known doctrines of the early Universalists of the Nineteenth Century. Those who were called Universalists were the ones who believe Christ came in finality in 70AD.
Erasmus Manford, Benjamin Franklin. An Oral Debate on the Coming of the Son of Man, Endless Punishment, and Universal Salvation. 1860.
Benjamin Franklin "At any suitable time and place, we will undertake to prove that the Universalists (hyper-preterists) differ from the Bible in the following particulars : They believe in a different God — a different Devil — a different Hell — a different Heaven — a different Saviour — a different Salvation — a different Sinner — a different Saint — a different Sin — a different Righteousness — a different Gospel — a different Judgment — a different second coming of Christ, and a different Resurrection of the Dead !"
Erasmus Manford, Benjamin Franklin. An Oral Debate on the Coming of the Son of Man, Endless Punishment, and Universal Salvation. 1860.
Benjamin Franklin "At any suitable time and place, we will undertake to prove that the Universalists (hyper-preterists) differ from the Bible in the following particulars : They believe in a different God — a different Devil — a different Hell — a different Heaven — a different Saviour — a different Salvation — a different Sinner — a different Saint — a different Sin — a different Righteousness — a different Gospel — a different Judgment — a different second coming of Christ, and a different Resurrection of the Dead !"
John Gill: The TIMELESS COVENANT THAT IS MADE AT CONVERSION
John Gill The Body of Divinity (ON THE EVERLASTING COVENANT)
"There are several time covenants made with men; as with Adam, Noah, Abraham, the children of Israel, Phinehas, David, &c. But the covenant made with Christ, and the elect in him, WAS NOT MADE IN TIME, BUT IN ETERNITY. It is a notion that commonly obtains, that God makes a covenant of grace with men when they believe, repent, &c. but it is no such thing; the covenant of grace does not then begin to be made, only to be made manifest; it then openly takes place, its blessings are bestowed, its promises applied, its grace is wrought in the hearts of men, when God puts his fear there, gives a new heart, and a new spirit, and puts his own Spirit there, to work faith, repentance, and every other grace; but then the covenant is not new made, but all this is done in virtue and in consequence of the covenant of grace made in eternity, and according to the tenor of that."
Source
"There are several time covenants made with men; as with Adam, Noah, Abraham, the children of Israel, Phinehas, David, &c. But the covenant made with Christ, and the elect in him, WAS NOT MADE IN TIME, BUT IN ETERNITY. It is a notion that commonly obtains, that God makes a covenant of grace with men when they believe, repent, &c. but it is no such thing; the covenant of grace does not then begin to be made, only to be made manifest; it then openly takes place, its blessings are bestowed, its promises applied, its grace is wrought in the hearts of men, when God puts his fear there, gives a new heart, and a new spirit, and puts his own Spirit there, to work faith, repentance, and every other grace; but then the covenant is not new made, but all this is done in virtue and in consequence of the covenant of grace made in eternity, and according to the tenor of that."
Source
The catastrophe of Jerusalem MUST APPEAR as the TERMINUS of CHRIST'S HONOR AND POWER
Theodor Keim. The History of Jesus of Nazara: Considered in Its Connection with the
national life of Israel, and related in detail. 1881.
There is also nothing more certain that that he, standing on the ground of a human self-consciousness, could find only this and no other adjustment of the difficulties of the situation, if he would connect the salvation of the world not only with the spiritual truths which he taught, but also with his own person and with his own Messiahship. It is equally certain that, from the same human standpoint, the catastrophe of Jerusalem MUST APPEAR as the TERMINUS in which his Messiahship upon earth should attain to honor and power." (page 260-261)
national life of Israel, and related in detail. 1881.
There is also nothing more certain that that he, standing on the ground of a human self-consciousness, could find only this and no other adjustment of the difficulties of the situation, if he would connect the salvation of the world not only with the spiritual truths which he taught, but also with his own person and with his own Messiahship. It is equally certain that, from the same human standpoint, the catastrophe of Jerusalem MUST APPEAR as the TERMINUS in which his Messiahship upon earth should attain to honor and power." (page 260-261)
Scot McKnight: Individual eschatology quite probable
I am almost certain we can find many more examples of this concept of "individual eschatology" which is ignored by all Hyper-Preterists. Here is one example by Paul. (2 Timothy 4:6-8) For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing.
Scot McKnight. The Synoptic Gospels. 2001.
"Luke had moved away from the view, widespread as far as we can tell in early Christianity, whereby men and woman expected a great irruption into the world which would bring about the end of the present world order and the final judgment of humankind; instead Luke may have adopted a more 'individual eschatology', whereby THE DECISIVE MOMENT OF JUDGMENT TOOK PLACE AT EACH INDIVIDUAL'S DEATH.
In support of this one can refer to the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (LK. 16.19-31, where both parties seem to receive their final reward or punishment immediately after death. So too Jesus' words to the dying thief on the cross, 'TODAY you will be with me in Paradise' (LK. 23.43) may point the same way. Similar too is the account of the death of Stephen who says that he sees the Son of Man standing (Acts 7.56), language which is more normally associated with the parousia and the final judgment at the end of time (cf. Lk. 12:8 ect.), and perhaps then indicating an INDIVIDUALIZED PAROUSIA FOR STEPHEN AT THE TIME OF HIS OWN PHYSICAL DEATH." (PAGE 277-278)
Scot McKnight. The Synoptic Gospels. 2001.
"Luke had moved away from the view, widespread as far as we can tell in early Christianity, whereby men and woman expected a great irruption into the world which would bring about the end of the present world order and the final judgment of humankind; instead Luke may have adopted a more 'individual eschatology', whereby THE DECISIVE MOMENT OF JUDGMENT TOOK PLACE AT EACH INDIVIDUAL'S DEATH.
In support of this one can refer to the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (LK. 16.19-31, where both parties seem to receive their final reward or punishment immediately after death. So too Jesus' words to the dying thief on the cross, 'TODAY you will be with me in Paradise' (LK. 23.43) may point the same way. Similar too is the account of the death of Stephen who says that he sees the Son of Man standing (Acts 7.56), language which is more normally associated with the parousia and the final judgment at the end of time (cf. Lk. 12:8 ect.), and perhaps then indicating an INDIVIDUALIZED PAROUSIA FOR STEPHEN AT THE TIME OF HIS OWN PHYSICAL DEATH." (PAGE 277-278)
Death always imminent and unpredictable
Francis Schüssler Fiorenza, John P. Galvin. Systematic Theology: Roman Catholic Perspectives
"There is a sense, therefore, in which death itself is the judgment of the individual; death is the condemnation of all that embodies self-centeredness and selfishness, but it is the consummation of all that embodies love and generosity because it is such a radical going forth from the self. Death fulfills these functions not only at the moment when it happens; it really casts its influence over the whole of life by the fact that it is always imminent and its moment is not known beforehand. The fact of death as certain but of its timing as unpredictable asks for a certain humility and acknowledgment of dependence and contingency at all times, in all projects and relationships. The refusal of such acknowledgment, which is in effect the denial of death, establishes an inauthentic mode of living and of relating to others as well as to God." (page 364)
"There is a sense, therefore, in which death itself is the judgment of the individual; death is the condemnation of all that embodies self-centeredness and selfishness, but it is the consummation of all that embodies love and generosity because it is such a radical going forth from the self. Death fulfills these functions not only at the moment when it happens; it really casts its influence over the whole of life by the fact that it is always imminent and its moment is not known beforehand. The fact of death as certain but of its timing as unpredictable asks for a certain humility and acknowledgment of dependence and contingency at all times, in all projects and relationships. The refusal of such acknowledgment, which is in effect the denial of death, establishes an inauthentic mode of living and of relating to others as well as to God." (page 364)
Turning away from the past, and take up the living
Josiah Strong. The Gospel of the Kingdom. 1910.
"Doubtless more PERVERSIONS have arisen at this point than at any other in church history. The persistent effort of the Church to live on the past, instead of living in intelligent, vital reaction with the present, has made most of the dismal, even bloody, pages of her record. This record has been made in spite of the conspicuous face that Jesus was a man of his own time. His continuous and final offense was that he insisted on calling his own generation to turn away from the past, and take up the living, pressing questions of the day. "It was said by them of old time, but I say unto you." This formula was beyond forgiveness. In the end it proved to be his death warrant. Nearly every attack upon the Church today is focused on this point. . . Having eyes it sees not, having ears it hears not the present, with its imperative needs."
"The environment of every living thing is as surely in the present tense as life itself. The leaves that have just fallen are fallen forever. They have left behind them the vital buds. Even while the living tree was detaching its outworn leaves, it was sheathing and varnishing its new buds against the present cold. it holds them in touch with its inmost life, and even during the winter's apparent death is bringing them on to the fruition of spring. Throughout the year the living tree is in instant contact with its living environment. NOW AS SURELY AS HE IS THE LIVING GOD, AND WE LIVE AND MOVE AND HAVE OUR BEING IN HIM, SO SURELY MUST THE CHURCH LIVE IN HIM IN INSTANT ONENESS OF LIFE.
"We may take the words uttered in lowest earthiness (ie. the fall of Jerusalem or the year 70AD) and exalt them to the highest, most heavenly meaning. (page 197)
"Doubtless more PERVERSIONS have arisen at this point than at any other in church history. The persistent effort of the Church to live on the past, instead of living in intelligent, vital reaction with the present, has made most of the dismal, even bloody, pages of her record. This record has been made in spite of the conspicuous face that Jesus was a man of his own time. His continuous and final offense was that he insisted on calling his own generation to turn away from the past, and take up the living, pressing questions of the day. "It was said by them of old time, but I say unto you." This formula was beyond forgiveness. In the end it proved to be his death warrant. Nearly every attack upon the Church today is focused on this point. . . Having eyes it sees not, having ears it hears not the present, with its imperative needs."
"The environment of every living thing is as surely in the present tense as life itself. The leaves that have just fallen are fallen forever. They have left behind them the vital buds. Even while the living tree was detaching its outworn leaves, it was sheathing and varnishing its new buds against the present cold. it holds them in touch with its inmost life, and even during the winter's apparent death is bringing them on to the fruition of spring. Throughout the year the living tree is in instant contact with its living environment. NOW AS SURELY AS HE IS THE LIVING GOD, AND WE LIVE AND MOVE AND HAVE OUR BEING IN HIM, SO SURELY MUST THE CHURCH LIVE IN HIM IN INSTANT ONENESS OF LIFE.
"We may take the words uttered in lowest earthiness (ie. the fall of Jerusalem or the year 70AD) and exalt them to the highest, most heavenly meaning. (page 197)
1 Cor 15. Spiritual Death is NONSENSE. It must be physical death
Fred "(1 Corinthians 15:20-22) 20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have died. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead also came through a man. 22 For just as in Adam all die, so also all will be made alive in Christ.
The thing to consider about verse 22 is that it says, “in Adam all die” not all are dead. Paul is still talking about physical (biological) death here. I question the idea of ‘spiritual death’. That is a theological term not a Biblical one. For almost thirty years, I believed in spiritual death and I know all of the theological arguments for it. At least most of them. Just because Adam did not die the day he ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil most assume he had to have spiritually died. The threat of death toward Adam was real but God was not about to fulfill it. First of all, the severity of the threat was to let Adam know the importance of it and secondly had Adam died then there would not have been any redemption for man. Adam did die as a result of his disobedience just as all others after him did, with the exception of Enoch and Elijah.
I will admit all are born with a depraved nature that leans toward sin and are in need of the salvation Christ performed on the cross. Christ’s blood must be applied to them.
1 Corinthians 15:31
31 Every day I am in danger of death! This is as sure as my boasting in you, brothers and sisters, which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord.
How could Paul be in danger of death every day if this was speaking of spiritual death? It would make no sense. It was physical death that he was in danger of.
1 Corinthians 15:48-49
48 Like the one made of dust, so too are those made of dust, and like the one from heaven, so too those who are heavenly. 49 And just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, let us also bear the image of the man of heaven.
I doubt Paul is speaking spiritually here. We have all borne the image of the man of the dust. I see that referring to our whole being, our body and mind. We are fit for this world, to travel and communicate with earthly things. Our spiritual body will be fit for heaven."
planetpreterist.com/news-5282.html#32859
The thing to consider about verse 22 is that it says, “in Adam all die” not all are dead. Paul is still talking about physical (biological) death here. I question the idea of ‘spiritual death’. That is a theological term not a Biblical one. For almost thirty years, I believed in spiritual death and I know all of the theological arguments for it. At least most of them. Just because Adam did not die the day he ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil most assume he had to have spiritually died. The threat of death toward Adam was real but God was not about to fulfill it. First of all, the severity of the threat was to let Adam know the importance of it and secondly had Adam died then there would not have been any redemption for man. Adam did die as a result of his disobedience just as all others after him did, with the exception of Enoch and Elijah.
I will admit all are born with a depraved nature that leans toward sin and are in need of the salvation Christ performed on the cross. Christ’s blood must be applied to them.
1 Corinthians 15:31
31 Every day I am in danger of death! This is as sure as my boasting in you, brothers and sisters, which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord.
How could Paul be in danger of death every day if this was speaking of spiritual death? It would make no sense. It was physical death that he was in danger of.
1 Corinthians 15:48-49
48 Like the one made of dust, so too are those made of dust, and like the one from heaven, so too those who are heavenly. 49 And just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, let us also bear the image of the man of heaven.
I doubt Paul is speaking spiritually here. We have all borne the image of the man of the dust. I see that referring to our whole being, our body and mind. We are fit for this world, to travel and communicate with earthly things. Our spiritual body will be fit for heaven."
planetpreterist.com/news-5282.html#32859
I will admit to you that full-preterists are all over the map
Jesse like many other preterists want to think they can't error or go astray. It is part of their delusion. Making comments like Jesse makes shows that you have swallowed their doctrine hook, line, and sinker. If you have swallowed Preterism whole, then the Berean spirit ceases when you stop challenging and asking questions. You can't claim to be a Berean if you have arrived at the destination. Preterists call themselves Berean but they are not. They have settled in to a view and built walls around it and refused to listen to anything else. This is a warning, a red flag, a sign that you need to flee.
Jesse Ahmann
"Preterist don't teach anything that is contrary to Scripture"
AND YET
"I will admit to you that full-preterists are all over the map concerning baptism, Lord's supper, resurrection, rapture, and salvation."
willnotdelay.blogspot.com/2008/07/please-post-your-preterist-lyrics-for.html
Jesse Ahmann
"Preterist don't teach anything that is contrary to Scripture"
AND YET
"I will admit to you that full-preterists are all over the map concerning baptism, Lord's supper, resurrection, rapture, and salvation."
willnotdelay.blogspot.com/2008/07/please-post-your-preterist-lyrics-for.html
NERO does not fit! So we must acquit.
"I don't want to be too sweeping in my statement about this, but, I have yet to see a Preterist interpret this in a non-laugh-inspiring manner. Their system is based on Nero being that man of sin, but Nero did not do anything like what the prophecy requires.
He probably never even journeyed close to Jerusalem. Much less did he take up residence in the temple.I don't believe there's a pre-70 AD referent that can be used to hang this prophecy on Nero, or any of the Roman emperors, for that matter. The closest I've seen anyone come is to point out that Caligula at one point desired to have a bust of himself placed in the Holy of Holies. He thought better of it once he realized he'd surely have a full-scale uprising on his hands if he did. But really, we're supposed to believe that an aborted plan is close enough? Are we playing Horseshoes here?
Additionally, Paul specifies that the man of sin would meet his end by being destroyed by the "brightness" of Christ's coming. (2 Thessalonians 2:8.) What do you think? Will the Preterist try to say that Nero's violent death represents another cloud/judgment coming of Christ? Certainly. So, I guess we've got another cloud-coming every time anyone on the planet dies.
And never mind that nagging detail about the brightness of it, which would seem to refer to something like visible glory.
Bottom line, Nero never claimed to be the God of the Jews. He preferred to be considered as Apollo, if memory serves. Nero never took a seat in the temple of God, claiming to be the God of that temple. He simply cannot be this man of sin, the son of perdition."
http://gordansplace.blogspot.com/2008/07/preterist-problems-11.html
He probably never even journeyed close to Jerusalem. Much less did he take up residence in the temple.I don't believe there's a pre-70 AD referent that can be used to hang this prophecy on Nero, or any of the Roman emperors, for that matter. The closest I've seen anyone come is to point out that Caligula at one point desired to have a bust of himself placed in the Holy of Holies. He thought better of it once he realized he'd surely have a full-scale uprising on his hands if he did. But really, we're supposed to believe that an aborted plan is close enough? Are we playing Horseshoes here?
Additionally, Paul specifies that the man of sin would meet his end by being destroyed by the "brightness" of Christ's coming. (2 Thessalonians 2:8.) What do you think? Will the Preterist try to say that Nero's violent death represents another cloud/judgment coming of Christ? Certainly. So, I guess we've got another cloud-coming every time anyone on the planet dies.
And never mind that nagging detail about the brightness of it, which would seem to refer to something like visible glory.
Bottom line, Nero never claimed to be the God of the Jews. He preferred to be considered as Apollo, if memory serves. Nero never took a seat in the temple of God, claiming to be the God of that temple. He simply cannot be this man of sin, the son of perdition."
http://gordansplace.blogspot.com/2008/07/preterist-problems-11.html
Michael Bennett: Great White Throne Judgment of AD70
Michael Bennett "IF: Satan is thrown into the Lake at the beginning of the GWT judgment. AND: The Great White Throne Judgment happens at AD70 (before some standing there tasted death) / (books opened when the power of the holy people was shattered). THEN: Satan was thrown into the lake at the beginning of the GWT Judgment and had to have happened at AD70.
As a preterist there is no way around the fact that Satan was thrown into the lake of fire at the START of the Great White Throne Judgment of AD70. I conclude that the 1000 years that John was writing about is the same event that Peter was writing about when he said one day is as 1000 years and 1000 years is as one day. John did not write about things outside of things ABOUT TO (mello) occur. Therefore: The 1000 years was the transition period and fits PERFECTLY with the logical proof above, that the Devil was thrown in the Lake of Fire at the beginning of the AD70 judgment."
preterism.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1632544%3ABlogPost%3A13449
As a preterist there is no way around the fact that Satan was thrown into the lake of fire at the START of the Great White Throne Judgment of AD70. I conclude that the 1000 years that John was writing about is the same event that Peter was writing about when he said one day is as 1000 years and 1000 years is as one day. John did not write about things outside of things ABOUT TO (mello) occur. Therefore: The 1000 years was the transition period and fits PERFECTLY with the logical proof above, that the Devil was thrown in the Lake of Fire at the beginning of the AD70 judgment."
preterism.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1632544%3ABlogPost%3A13449
Though Paul died in 68AD, He had to WAIT two years before receiving his Crown
Charles Julius Guiteau. The Truth; a Companion to the Bible. 1879.
"Yes, yes, thou Paul, waited only two years for thy "crown." Thou wert executed AD 68, and thy Master came at the destruction of Jerusalem, AD70, and gavest thee thy "crown" (Guiteau, p. 30)
(2 Timothy 4:7-8) I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing.
So I guess this answers the question, that Paul looked toward 70AD and not towards the reward he would receive upon crossing the finish line. Brilliant!
Here Ed Stevens making the SAME EXACT CLAIM as Guiteau. Funny Stuff.
___________________________________________________________
Footnote "Guiteau's book "The Truth; a Companion to the Bible" was almost entirely plagiarized from the work of John Humphrey Noyes." "Charles Julius Guiteau was an American lawyer who assassinated U.S. President James A. Garfield on July 2, 1881. He was executed by hanging." "Guiteau then decided that God had commanded him to kill the ungrateful President."
"Yes, yes, thou Paul, waited only two years for thy "crown." Thou wert executed AD 68, and thy Master came at the destruction of Jerusalem, AD70, and gavest thee thy "crown" (Guiteau, p. 30)
(2 Timothy 4:7-8) I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing.
So I guess this answers the question, that Paul looked toward 70AD and not towards the reward he would receive upon crossing the finish line. Brilliant!
Here Ed Stevens making the SAME EXACT CLAIM as Guiteau. Funny Stuff.
___________________________________________________________
Footnote "Guiteau's book "The Truth; a Companion to the Bible" was almost entirely plagiarized from the work of John Humphrey Noyes." "Charles Julius Guiteau was an American lawyer who assassinated U.S. President James A. Garfield on July 2, 1881. He was executed by hanging." "Guiteau then decided that God had commanded him to kill the ungrateful President."
Virgil Vaduva: Bye bye body of death. Hello new body of life. Thank God for 70AD!
Virgil Vaduva "Throughout Romans 8 Paul is creating the tension between Old Covenant (Law, Old Creation) and the New Covenant (New Creation) in which "the redemption of OUR BODY (singular) will take place (temporally focused on horizontal dualism). He is even using the imagery of birth (the entire creation was in birth pains) UNTIL NOW. (with Preterism, you must keep in mind that the first century's hope was 70AD, so any future phases had 70AD, AND ONLY 70AD, in mind. Hyper-Preterist believe since all prophecy was fulfilled, the bible DOES NOT SPEAK BEYOND THAT PERIOD. Again Preterism passes off our struggles, our pains, and tribulations in the flesh and makes it about THEM, NOT US. Another trick of Satan. How mistaken they are to conclude that the body in birth pains was the "Jewish law, the body of death", and not point it to body of flesh which is at constant war and struggle with our spirit.)
The New Creation which was ready to be born while Paul was writing Romans happened in the first century. Remember, the Jewish temple was the ultimate standing symbol of the Jewish law, the body of death, the place where animals were being sacrificed on our behalf. That body of death WAS destroyed and a new body of Christ (the Church) finally WAS inaugurated (in 70AD) into God's presence; only in this body can one find life. The Church is the New Creation, the New Jerusalem, the New Israel, the new "living body.""
krusekronicle.typepad.com/kruse_kronicle/2008/05/the-earth-destr.html
"How much" a person sins has nothing to do with Christ defeating "the sin" and "the death" of Adam
Preterism tries to make a dividing line between "the sin" and "sin" and "the death" and "death" and tries to make these two separate issues. If "the sin" was defeated in 70AD would not the effects of "the sin" be limited in such a way that it could not rule over our lives OR the lives of the world. What is the purpose of being called out of the world, if we desire to remain in it? Clearly a horizontal view for sure that leads to fleshly thinking. No historical moment in time can remove that which is not historical. Man has the choice to die to the world below or live in it. Christ's work IS WITHIN US NOT OUTSIDE OF US. His righteousness DOES NOT MAKE us righteous, but allows us to comprehend righteousness, thus by following him, we put on HIM and he clothes us. Christ's wholeness does not make us whole. One must WANT to become WHOLE, or one must WANT to bear his own Cross. When Christ becomes KING over our heart, those sins and the dominion that Satan has over the flesh are cast out. We must continue dying to ourself and make him Lord and King. Giving him part or half CONTINUES to separate us from God. Preterism cast aside "sin" and "death" by making the argument more about Adam rather than finding the courage to face our own sin through the power of God.
(Matthew 16:25) “For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.
(Matthew 19:17) And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
(Matthew 19:21) Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”
(John 5:6) When Jesus saw him lying there, and knew that he had already been a long time in that condition, He said to him, “Do you wish to get well?”
Jesus never healed anyone who afterward remained sick. Nor did Christ forgive sins yet allow the sin to remain behind, as if he missed one. Likewise, this notion that "the sin" or "the death" was removed through any historical event but partially remained in tact is a bogus notion that must be rejected.
Big Bus ""how much" a person sins has nothing to do with Christ defeating "the sin" and "the death" of Adam...which is what redemption is about. We've replaced the work of Christ with our own works...instead of looking inward, we need to look to Christ. There's no difference between having a pinch of lust, and a teaspoon of anger, and committing adultery and murder. We're all still SINNERS..the EFFECTS of the fall are with us forever...but Christ DEFEATED THE DEATH, which was the separation wrought through Adam's transgression.
When the Scriptures state that we are "made perfect", that doesn't have anything to do with how we behave. It has to do with our standing before God, thanks to the perfect and cleansing work of Christ on the cross."
christiandiscussionforums.org/v/showthread.php?p=3210795#poststop
(Matthew 16:25) “For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.
(Matthew 19:17) And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
(Matthew 19:21) Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”
(John 5:6) When Jesus saw him lying there, and knew that he had already been a long time in that condition, He said to him, “Do you wish to get well?”
Jesus never healed anyone who afterward remained sick. Nor did Christ forgive sins yet allow the sin to remain behind, as if he missed one. Likewise, this notion that "the sin" or "the death" was removed through any historical event but partially remained in tact is a bogus notion that must be rejected.
Big Bus ""how much" a person sins has nothing to do with Christ defeating "the sin" and "the death" of Adam...which is what redemption is about. We've replaced the work of Christ with our own works...instead of looking inward, we need to look to Christ. There's no difference between having a pinch of lust, and a teaspoon of anger, and committing adultery and murder. We're all still SINNERS..the EFFECTS of the fall are with us forever...but Christ DEFEATED THE DEATH, which was the separation wrought through Adam's transgression.
When the Scriptures state that we are "made perfect", that doesn't have anything to do with how we behave. It has to do with our standing before God, thanks to the perfect and cleansing work of Christ on the cross."
christiandiscussionforums.org/v/showthread.php?p=3210795#poststop
If a Hyper-Preterist suggests he can still sin then his salvation is not “full”
PaulT "one wonders why a Hyper-Preterist would suggest sin remains especially within himself if indeed as they claim the 2nd Advent has occurred, “will appear a second time, not to carry any burden of sin nor deal with sin, but to bring to full salvation those who are [eagerly, constantly, and patiently] waiting for and expecting Him.” Amplified Heb 9:28. According to this if the 2nd Advent has indeed arrived sin should be eradicated and believers should be partaking in full salvation, IOW no struggle with sin in their old nature, because they have entered into “full” salvation. If the Hyper-Preterist suggests he can still sin then his salvation is not “full”."
christiandiscussionforums.org/v/showthread.php?p=3210795#poststop
christiandiscussionforums.org/v/showthread.php?p=3210795#poststop
NT Wright: HyperPreterism equals Hymenaeus and Philetus
NT Wright. Christian Origins and the Question of God. 2003.
"The best explanation of what Hymenaeus and Philetus were teaching is that they were pioneering a view which, as we shall see, was to become popular in other circles in due course, according to which "the resurrection" was now to be interpreted, not in terms of a future bodily hope after death, but purely and simply in terms of a spiritual experience which could be enjoyed during the present life. Certain people had had this experience; they were already, in this new metaphorical sense, "raised from the dead". It is not clear whether the two were encouraging others to have this experiences as well, or whether the point of their teaching was that if one was not already among those favored in this way there was now no hope. One way or another, they were drawing people away from what was being seen as mainstream Christian hope." (page 267-268)
"The best explanation of what Hymenaeus and Philetus were teaching is that they were pioneering a view which, as we shall see, was to become popular in other circles in due course, according to which "the resurrection" was now to be interpreted, not in terms of a future bodily hope after death, but purely and simply in terms of a spiritual experience which could be enjoyed during the present life. Certain people had had this experience; they were already, in this new metaphorical sense, "raised from the dead". It is not clear whether the two were encouraging others to have this experiences as well, or whether the point of their teaching was that if one was not already among those favored in this way there was now no hope. One way or another, they were drawing people away from what was being seen as mainstream Christian hope." (page 267-268)
It is better to say that there is NO Resurrection, THAN THAT IT IS ALREADY PAST
Augustine, John Chrysostom, Philip Schaff. Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian. 1889.
"Of whom is Hymeneus and Philetus," Ver. 18. "Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrown the faith of some." He has well said, "They will increase unto more ungodliness." For it appears indeed to be a solitary evil, but see what evils spring out of it. For if the Resurrection is already past, not only do we suffer loss in being deprived of that great glory, but because judgment is taken away, and retribution also. For if the Resurrection is past, retribution is past. The good therefore have reaped persecutions and afflictions, and the wicked have not been punished, nay verily, they live in great pleasure. IT WERE BETTER TO SAY THAT THERE IS NO RESURRECTION, THAN THAT IT IS ALREADY PAST. "And overthrow," he says, "the faith of some." "Of some," not of all. For if there is no resurrection, faith is subverted. Out preaching is vain, nor was HE born, nor has He ascended into heaven. Observe how this ERROR, while it seems to oppose the doctrine of the Resurrection, draws after it many other EVILS. (page 493)
"Of whom is Hymeneus and Philetus," Ver. 18. "Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrown the faith of some." He has well said, "They will increase unto more ungodliness." For it appears indeed to be a solitary evil, but see what evils spring out of it. For if the Resurrection is already past, not only do we suffer loss in being deprived of that great glory, but because judgment is taken away, and retribution also. For if the Resurrection is past, retribution is past. The good therefore have reaped persecutions and afflictions, and the wicked have not been punished, nay verily, they live in great pleasure. IT WERE BETTER TO SAY THAT THERE IS NO RESURRECTION, THAN THAT IT IS ALREADY PAST. "And overthrow," he says, "the faith of some." "Of some," not of all. For if there is no resurrection, faith is subverted. Out preaching is vain, nor was HE born, nor has He ascended into heaven. Observe how this ERROR, while it seems to oppose the doctrine of the Resurrection, draws after it many other EVILS. (page 493)
Tim King: Looking for a Day of Rest AFTER Jesus
Tim King, A House that Stands. 2003.
"Abraham looked for more than the physical dimension that the promises had to offer. He looked for the heavenly city – the true fullness of these promises (Heb. 11:10,16). The book of Hebrews tells us, “if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later about another day” (Hebrews 4:8). But as A.D. 70 approached it is clear that believers had not yet entered into such a day. They had yet to find this day of rest. (as if 70AD gave them something that Jesus Christ did not already give them???) This “other day,” however, was rapidly approaching (Heb. 10:33). This would be the time that the heavenly city would come down (metaphorically) and the rule of God would everywhere be found."
"Augustine saw two cities, a city of God and a city of man. In Augustine’s view, we spend our lives trying to escape the city of man and attain (at our death) the City of God. That portrait is no different from the sojourn of Abraham. . . That view neutralizes the ministry of Jesus, making him no better than Abraham."
"The apostle John envisioned the ultimate day of rest as the time when the heavenly Jerusalem would see its arrival on earth (Revelation 22:1ff.), and the apostle Paul saw this as the time when God would be “all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28). It is the heavenly city coming down that connects us in our eternal walk with God, in our eternal rest with him." (page 52)
"Fortunately, Scripture provides an interpretive clue by demonstrating to us that Jesus came to reverse Eden’s damage. By the focus of his ministry it is evident he knew that if you take away sin you take away the death (spiritual death) that Eden brought. Jesus came to put away death by putting away sin." (page 66)
"For them, they see the work of the Spirit as associated with the immaturity of the church – thus, when the body of Christ came to maturity in A.D. 70, those things associated with its formation simply went by the wayside as remnants of a previous era. The former things would include words of knowledge, gifts of healing, miracles, prophecy, speaking in tongues, and the interpretation of tongues (cf. 1 Cor. 12:8- 10)."
"Whether one sees the “complete” as the New Covenant order or the arrival of Christ in his people or even the Bible as we have received it, the point is that the “complete” is now here and so the partial, i.e., miraculous working of the Spirit, is over."(page 94)
"Abraham looked for more than the physical dimension that the promises had to offer. He looked for the heavenly city – the true fullness of these promises (Heb. 11:10,16). The book of Hebrews tells us, “if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later about another day” (Hebrews 4:8). But as A.D. 70 approached it is clear that believers had not yet entered into such a day. They had yet to find this day of rest. (as if 70AD gave them something that Jesus Christ did not already give them???) This “other day,” however, was rapidly approaching (Heb. 10:33). This would be the time that the heavenly city would come down (metaphorically) and the rule of God would everywhere be found."
"Augustine saw two cities, a city of God and a city of man. In Augustine’s view, we spend our lives trying to escape the city of man and attain (at our death) the City of God. That portrait is no different from the sojourn of Abraham. . . That view neutralizes the ministry of Jesus, making him no better than Abraham."
"The apostle John envisioned the ultimate day of rest as the time when the heavenly Jerusalem would see its arrival on earth (Revelation 22:1ff.), and the apostle Paul saw this as the time when God would be “all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28). It is the heavenly city coming down that connects us in our eternal walk with God, in our eternal rest with him." (page 52)
"Fortunately, Scripture provides an interpretive clue by demonstrating to us that Jesus came to reverse Eden’s damage. By the focus of his ministry it is evident he knew that if you take away sin you take away the death (spiritual death) that Eden brought. Jesus came to put away death by putting away sin." (page 66)
"For them, they see the work of the Spirit as associated with the immaturity of the church – thus, when the body of Christ came to maturity in A.D. 70, those things associated with its formation simply went by the wayside as remnants of a previous era. The former things would include words of knowledge, gifts of healing, miracles, prophecy, speaking in tongues, and the interpretation of tongues (cf. 1 Cor. 12:8- 10)."
"Whether one sees the “complete” as the New Covenant order or the arrival of Christ in his people or even the Bible as we have received it, the point is that the “complete” is now here and so the partial, i.e., miraculous working of the Spirit, is over."(page 94)
Max King: Delusions of 70AD when ALL THINGS CHANGED
Max King. Old Testament Israel and New Testament Salvation. 1990.
"It will be seen that the A.D. 70 consummation of Old Testament Israel was the focus of “the future” and “the end” taught in the gospel." (page 8)
"It will be shown, therefore, that this eschatological goal of the gospel was reached in the A.D. 70 consummation, when all things written were fulfilled" (page 20)
"Paul goes on to point out concerning Israel, “And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again” (v. 23). This commonly is interpreted to mean that throughout the Christian age any Jew converted to Christ shall be saved. That is true, however it isn’t Paul’s point here. First, when Paul speaks of “Israel” he has in mind more than contemporary Jews of his day. And BY NO MEANS IS HE THINKING OF JEWS IN THE CENTURIES FOLLOWING THE END OF THE JEWISH AGE IN AD 70." (page 11)
"The coming of the kingdom of Christ (Matt. 16:28) or the kingdom of God in power (Mk. 9:1) was the end result of Christ’s pre-end-of-the-Jewish-age reign. The continued presence of the Jewish age until its end in A.D. 70 marks the period of Christ’s absence." (page 42)
"We conclude, therefore, that there is only ONE coming of Christ and his kingdom, that it occurred in the A.D. 70 consummation, that it fulfilled the coming of the kingdom of God in power" (page 44)
"This was the future (the end) affirmed by Paul in 1 Cor. 15:24, when through the age-changing reign of Christ, DEATH, the last enemy, was destroyed. THEN the reign of God was established eternally in the new heavens and earth. THEN the dead were raised incorruption and the mortal put on immortality the prophecy of Isaiah 25:8 was fulfilled, "Death is swallowed up in victory." THEN, the sting of death forever was removed, because that which was its sting (SIN), and that which was sin's strength (THE LAW) had no place in the new heavens and earth. THEN God's promise to Israel to "make an end of sins" and to "bring in everlasting righteousness" was fulfilled. THEN was won the victory through Jesus Christ. THEN the salvation which is of the Jews came to its full realization and manifestation through the revelation of Jesus Christ. THEN all things written were fulfilled. THEN the mission of the Old Testament in bringing us to Christ was accomplished. NOTHING failed. NOTHING was delayed. NOTHING was postponed. NOTHING was carried into the Christian age unfulfilled. (page 70 of the original book)
"It will be seen that the A.D. 70 consummation of Old Testament Israel was the focus of “the future” and “the end” taught in the gospel." (page 8)
"It will be shown, therefore, that this eschatological goal of the gospel was reached in the A.D. 70 consummation, when all things written were fulfilled" (page 20)
"Paul goes on to point out concerning Israel, “And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again” (v. 23). This commonly is interpreted to mean that throughout the Christian age any Jew converted to Christ shall be saved. That is true, however it isn’t Paul’s point here. First, when Paul speaks of “Israel” he has in mind more than contemporary Jews of his day. And BY NO MEANS IS HE THINKING OF JEWS IN THE CENTURIES FOLLOWING THE END OF THE JEWISH AGE IN AD 70." (page 11)
"The coming of the kingdom of Christ (Matt. 16:28) or the kingdom of God in power (Mk. 9:1) was the end result of Christ’s pre-end-of-the-Jewish-age reign. The continued presence of the Jewish age until its end in A.D. 70 marks the period of Christ’s absence." (page 42)
"We conclude, therefore, that there is only ONE coming of Christ and his kingdom, that it occurred in the A.D. 70 consummation, that it fulfilled the coming of the kingdom of God in power" (page 44)
"This was the future (the end) affirmed by Paul in 1 Cor. 15:24, when through the age-changing reign of Christ, DEATH, the last enemy, was destroyed. THEN the reign of God was established eternally in the new heavens and earth. THEN the dead were raised incorruption and the mortal put on immortality the prophecy of Isaiah 25:8 was fulfilled, "Death is swallowed up in victory." THEN, the sting of death forever was removed, because that which was its sting (SIN), and that which was sin's strength (THE LAW) had no place in the new heavens and earth. THEN God's promise to Israel to "make an end of sins" and to "bring in everlasting righteousness" was fulfilled. THEN was won the victory through Jesus Christ. THEN the salvation which is of the Jews came to its full realization and manifestation through the revelation of Jesus Christ. THEN all things written were fulfilled. THEN the mission of the Old Testament in bringing us to Christ was accomplished. NOTHING failed. NOTHING was delayed. NOTHING was postponed. NOTHING was carried into the Christian age unfulfilled. (page 70 of the original book)
No promise of salvation SINCE THAT TIME
Alexander Wilford Hall. Universalism Against Itself: A Scriptural Analysis of the Doctrine. 1883.
"if all God's elect children were gathered at the destruction of Jerusalem, then there have been none elected since; and as there is no promise of salvation to any but the elect through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth; it follows, therefore, that all who have lived and died SINCE THAT TIME, ARE LOST, AND THUS UNIVERSALISM [HYPER-PRETERISM], INSTEAD OF HOLDING FORTH A UNIVERSAL SALVATION, COMES NEARER A UNIVERSAL DAMNATION, THEMSELVES BEING JUDGES.
"if all God's elect children were gathered at the destruction of Jerusalem, then there have been none elected since; and as there is no promise of salvation to any but the elect through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth; it follows, therefore, that all who have lived and died SINCE THAT TIME, ARE LOST, AND THUS UNIVERSALISM [HYPER-PRETERISM], INSTEAD OF HOLDING FORTH A UNIVERSAL SALVATION, COMES NEARER A UNIVERSAL DAMNATION, THEMSELVES BEING JUDGES.
"TO SUGGEST THIS IS TEMPORAL AFFLICTION OF JEWS IN 70 AD IS FANTASTICALLY SILLY"
Douglas J. Deltondo, Douglas J. Del Tondo. Jesus' Words on Salvation. 2008.
The older school of Protestant theologians has a similarly astonishing solution. They limited the parable's validity to only the period of 33 AD to 70AD. Whittemore summarized the support for this. He canvassed all the opinions from major theologians that endorsed this idea. He was arguing that this parable was fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem. Whittemore claimed it THEREFORE HAD NO FURTHER MORAL MEANING FOR ANY CHRISTIAN THEREAFTER. "We think, then, we must have shown to the satisfaction of every individual who shall peruse those pages, that this while parable was completely fulfilled at the time of Christ's coming to the Jewish state [at the temple destruction in 70 AD.]." His proof is the temple destruction took place "within forty years after the crucifixion" and this is when the goats were supposedly punished. (Thomas Whittemore, Notes and Illustrations of the Parables of the New Testament (Boston: J.M. Usher, 1855) at 347.) Even though Jesus speaks of this judgment for the goats being with the same "fire" for the diabolos 9devil) and his angels, Whittemore claims the diabolos can mean simply "adversary . . very often . . human beings" and that fire can mean simply temporal affliction, NOT HELL. (id at 350.) Whittemore says the diabolos is a reference by Jesus to the Jews of 70 AD, and the fire to the temple destruction that same year."
"TO SUGGEST THIS IS TEMPORAL AFFLICTION OF JEWS IN 70 AD IS FANTASTICALLY SILLY. . . CLEARLY, ALL OF WHITTEMORE'S NON-SENSE WAS AN EXTREMELY STRAINED READING SO AS TO REIGN IN A PARABLE DIRECTLY DESTRUCTIVE OF THE FABLE OF CHEAP GRACE." (PAGE 228.)
The older school of Protestant theologians has a similarly astonishing solution. They limited the parable's validity to only the period of 33 AD to 70AD. Whittemore summarized the support for this. He canvassed all the opinions from major theologians that endorsed this idea. He was arguing that this parable was fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem. Whittemore claimed it THEREFORE HAD NO FURTHER MORAL MEANING FOR ANY CHRISTIAN THEREAFTER. "We think, then, we must have shown to the satisfaction of every individual who shall peruse those pages, that this while parable was completely fulfilled at the time of Christ's coming to the Jewish state [at the temple destruction in 70 AD.]." His proof is the temple destruction took place "within forty years after the crucifixion" and this is when the goats were supposedly punished. (Thomas Whittemore, Notes and Illustrations of the Parables of the New Testament (Boston: J.M. Usher, 1855) at 347.) Even though Jesus speaks of this judgment for the goats being with the same "fire" for the diabolos 9devil) and his angels, Whittemore claims the diabolos can mean simply "adversary . . very often . . human beings" and that fire can mean simply temporal affliction, NOT HELL. (id at 350.) Whittemore says the diabolos is a reference by Jesus to the Jews of 70 AD, and the fire to the temple destruction that same year."
"TO SUGGEST THIS IS TEMPORAL AFFLICTION OF JEWS IN 70 AD IS FANTASTICALLY SILLY. . . CLEARLY, ALL OF WHITTEMORE'S NON-SENSE WAS AN EXTREMELY STRAINED READING SO AS TO REIGN IN A PARABLE DIRECTLY DESTRUCTIVE OF THE FABLE OF CHEAP GRACE." (PAGE 228.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)