On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Sun Dec 20, 2015 5:11 pm

jeff@dgjc.org wrote:Thanks @maintenanceman

Yes I agree with much of that without having the time right now to debate the details. However, it seems to me that it is too difficult to compress all these prophetic passages to 70ad. To be sure Revelation is John's contribution to the Olivet Discourse, but he also contributes more detail and I think more future. That is why I fall into the partial preterist line of thinking. The passages that I find too difficult to find fulfillment in 70ad include ...

Job 19:25
Acts 1
1 Thess 4:16-17
parts of Matt 24
Revelation 20:4-5

It should be noted that Sproul has also said he believes in multiple parousiasi, while still looking for a return of Christ in the flesh.

Also regarding the justification of those punished in Hades, the heart of my conclusion is that I believe all mankind was justified at the cross. I understand that faith does not cause justification, but receives our justification. I think I may have pointed you to the wrong article. Check this one if still interested. http://www.dgjc.org/dgjc/justified.


Thanx Jeff,

Yes Sproul does fall into the partial preterist view. All well and good. He still has time to come to the light side! :D I just mentioned this for a reference to what others view mat 24 as.

As you already know the (or at least one of the) major chasm between full and partial preterist's is the idea of a fleshly resurrection. Bodies (fleshly) being rejuvenated and made glorious. Where are the bodies?

Good luck and I'll be sure to check out your link!

Thanks,

Chad
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby jeff@dgjc.org » Sun Dec 20, 2015 5:41 pm

Thanks and on your last question I thought that was my question to you :-). Where are the bodies?

My understanding is the resurrection of the body or at least final glorification remains still future for all mankind.
User avatar
jeff@dgjc.org
 
Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 4:18 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Sun Dec 20, 2015 7:16 pm

Jeff,

Glorification is complete.
It is finished, as the Christ said.

You are looking through a view of personal salvation as opposed to a covenant view of what God had done through Israel/Christ and thus the church for the reconciliation of His creation.

You are looking to the future, and I am simply looking to the cross as the ultimate reconciler.

2 Cor 11:3 But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.



Halleluiah

Thanks!

Chad
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Sun Dec 20, 2015 9:57 pm

jeff@dgjc.org wrote:Forgive me if I sounded impatient. I thought I already answered that earlier.

do you believe humanity is “in Christ”?


Yes I do. In fact I believe humanity has always been in Christ since day 1.

But Jeff… you deliberately keep avoiding by deflection from what I’ve actully asked, continuously, i.e., for “scriptural” evidence to your contention THAT… “Hades still exists to punish the unbelieving wicked dead, but this punishment certainly does not pay any price toward their justification. All are already justified in Christ.” I am NOT challenging your notion that “that humanity is in Christ” so you can stop giving that answer.

And in reading your article this is the closest I came to finding anything remotely touching what you’ve said above…
Yet he has not saved all from Hades for their unbelief, or saved all from sin because of their disobedience, or saved all from loss for their carelessness, or saved all from harm for their prayerlessness.

Well this is all nice and dandy BUT apart from this assertion of yours that such is true there is given NO scriptural evidence to prove such is true. I have to therefore conclude Jeff that your position is in error scripturally speaking as you will not/cannot show otherwise.

Again… consider the logic: IF Christ Himself bore the penalty for SIN at Calvary (when we were yet enemies) how do you then find yet MORE sin that Jesus didn’t suffer for (apparently) that *the justified* in hades postmortem STILL has to suffer themselves to rectify (thus who really needs Jesus’ sacrifice) for themselves????? LIKE I said… your theory, and THAT’S all it’s proving to be, denudes the Cross of its power. (Can you NOT see the FAULT in your logic Jeff?)

jeff@dgjc.org wrote:Unbelieving humans beings, however, are punished in the temporal fires of Hades. 1 Corinthians 15:55 and numerous other Scripture warn of this punishment,…

And yet as Paul would say “what saith the Scripture…
    1Cor 15:55O Death, where is your sting?
        O Hades, where is your victory?”
Again Jeff there seems to be daylight and lots of it between what you say the scripture says and what the Scriptures ACTUALLY say. :roll:
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby jeff@dgjc.org » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:31 am

@davo

Can you NOT see the FAULT in your logic Jeff?

I am trying to understand your objections, but the fault in the logic still seems to be yours.

Here is my simple logic.
1. Scripture proves that the cross paid for the sins and justified all mankind, Romans 5:12-21. Do you disagree that God loves all mankind?
2. Scripture proves that people are still punished after the cross, Acts 5:1-11. Do you disagree that God loved and saved Anaias and Sapphira?
3. Scripture proves that the wicked dead are still detained in Hades after the cross, Revelation 20:5, 13. Do you agree that Hades will be emptied?
4. Conclusion God loves all mankind, before and after the cross whether dead or alive, or rewarded or temporarily punished.

Again… consider the logic: IF Christ Himself bore the penalty for SIN at Calvary (when we were yet enemies) how do you then find yet MORE sin that Jesus didn’t suffer for (apparently) that *the justified* in hades postmortem STILL has to suffer themselves to rectify (thus who really needs Jesus’ sacrifice) for themselves????? LIKE I said… your theory, and THAT’S all it’s proving to be, denudes the Cross of its power.

This statement seems to be the error in your logic. I have already said that the penalties given to the unbelieving do nothing to justify them before the Lord. Only the cross accomplished that. Punishment and discipline do not serve the purpose of justification. Until you let go of that I am not sure you will see my point or acknowledge the Scriptures I am highlighting.

I am a father of four children myself. I am not the best parent, but I sought to discipline my children in love for their own benefit. I tried to make a point of telling them that they were forgiven by the Lord even if I didn't properly demonstrate it and to my best ability they were forgiven by me even before I served their punishment. Punishment was not given to justify them to me. It was given to teach them. Hebrews 12:7-11.

So many universalists acknowledge these points. Talbott's book, the Inescapable Love of God was my favorite on the subject of the nature of God's discipline of the unbelieving after death. The points made are that eternal punishment would be unjust, but temporal discipline could and would only serve a loving purpose if God determined it.

@maintenanceman

Glorification is complete.

Will there be a time in the future when my back pain is permanently removed and I no longer sin?
User avatar
jeff@dgjc.org
 
Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 4:18 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Mon Dec 21, 2015 6:27 am

jeff@dgjc.org wrote:2. Scripture proves that people are still punished after the cross, Acts 5:1-11.

And WHERE Jeff does THIS say such applies “postmortem” – which is your argument – the one you won’t/can’t substantiate.

jeff@dgjc.org wrote:3. Scripture proves that the wicked dead are still detained in Hades after the cross, Revelation 20:5, 13.

Yeah… AND BEFORE the parousia; the parousia is past, thus so is hades! Ergo… no ongoing loving torture being “ministered” to *the justified* by Jesus.

jeff@dgjc.org wrote:Punishment and discipline do not serve the purpose of justification. Until you let go of that I am not sure you will see my point or acknowledge the Scriptures I am highlighting.

Image Image... lol Jeff, NOWHERE have I said nor intimated anything like **punishment and discipline serve the purpose of justification.** Sorry Jeff but I have to call you on this… you are just making this stuff up, maybe to pad out your posts I don’t know, BUT this is far from reality.

jeff@dgjc.org wrote:Will there be a time in the future when my back pain is permanently removed and I no longer sin?

Yes… when you are physically dead.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Mon Dec 21, 2015 10:07 am

Davo, I think 1 Corinthians 3 is probably about post-mortem punishment.

1 Cor 15
15 If any man’s work is burned, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, but as through fire.

In what sense were people with bad works saved through fire in AD 70?
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Mon Dec 21, 2015 10:14 am

qaz wrote:Davo, I think 1 Corinthians 3 is probably about post-mortem punishment.

1 Cor 15
15 If any man’s work is burned, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, but as through fire.

In what sense were people with bad works saved through fire in AD 70?



Is this tied by any way to Nero playing the fiddle - while Rome burned?

Eastern Anglo-Catholic / Holy Fool; Inclusivism / Purgatorial Conditionalism / Nicene Creed / ACNA; Theosis; Zombie Apocalypse;
Contemplation (Mindfulness, Fox Golden Key, Yoga); Healing (Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Kampo, Bruno Gröning, Johrei, Charismatic, Čhaŋnúŋpa);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 3024
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Mon Dec 21, 2015 1:51 pm

qaz wrote:Davo, I think 1 Corinthians 3 is probably about post-mortem punishment.

1 Cor 15
15 If any man’s work is burned, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, but as through fire.

In what sense were people with bad works saved through fire in AD 70?

This “could” involve postmortem BUT it does necessitate it… remember, according to Mt 16:27-28 the gain or loss of rewards at the parousia didn’t require physical death – “some standing here” were to be alive and “remaining” (1Thess 4:15) i.e., surviving through this historical/covenantal EVENT. WHAT such rewards looked like and HOW such rewarding transpired we simple are not told. However John does refer “to him that overcomes will I grant…” etc, which appears more relational than tangible in terms of “reward” – which IF that was the case would be in-line with Jesus’ previous definitive definition of “eternal life” being NOT quantitative endless existence BUT qualitative relational LIFE, as per Jn 17:3; 10:10b et al; IOW… blessedness of life in the here and now.

But that aside and to be clear… from the pantelist perspective there was great “loss” in the fires of AD70, which by the way weren’t restricted to the Jewish Capitol, but the 1Cor 3:15 passage refers specifically to “believers” i.e., *the justified* and there was/is NO ‘hades’ then or thereafter for them to be in torments in – the notion is simply false.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Mon Dec 21, 2015 2:26 pm

As a preterist, I don't think Hades still exists. Any postmortem punishment would take place in the lake of fire.
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:26 pm

qaz wrote:As a preterist, I don't think Hades still exists. Any postmortem punishment would take place in the lake of fire.

As a pantelist “the lake of fire” doesn’t exist. John’s ‘the lake of fire’ equates to Jesus’ ‘Gehenna’ i.e., the AD70 destruction of Jerusalem. This was Israel’s (Jerusalem’s) “second death” aka “lake of fire” – the first death being Nebuchadnezzar’s 587BC rout and ruination of the same.

Remember John’s ‘Revelation’ was “symbolic” – it was “signified” (Rev 1:1) – by way of signs <ἐσήμανεν esēmanen> (symbol i.e., picture-words) of “things which must shortly take place.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:56 pm

I agree that Revelation is almost entirely about AD 70. That said, in the final chapter it contrasts those who make up the kingdom and those who are outside the kingdom's gates. I don't think it makes sense to conclude that members of these two groups, upon biological death, will have the same experience.
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:41 pm

qaz wrote:That said, in the final chapter it contrasts those who make up the kingdom and those who are outside the kingdom's gates.

As I understand it the contrast is indeed between “the sheep” (faithful) and “the goats” (unfaithful) Israel, being demonstrated in those who did and those who didn’t escape the perilous times of Jerusalem’s fall (this of course included broader Palestine and beyond in terms of Roman clamp down on Jewish insurrectionists, of which early Jewish believers were considered of a similar mold, i.e., not confessing “Caesar is Lord” but “Jesus is Lord”).

qaz wrote:I don't think it makes sense to conclude that members of these two groups, upon biological death, will have the same experience.

What do you conclude is (was) the difference in experience, and what informs your thoughts on this?
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Mon Dec 21, 2015 8:37 pm

davo wrote:As I understand it the contrast is indeed between “the sheep” (faithful) and “the goats” (unfaithful) Israel, being demonstrated in those who did and those who didn’t escape the perilous times of Jerusalem’s fall (this of course included broader Palestine and beyond in terms of Roman clamp down on Jewish insurrectionists, of which early Jewish believers were considered of a similar mold, i.e., not confessing “Caesar is Lord” but “Jesus is Lord”).


Right, but unless we're going to say the kingdom was only made up of 1st century Christians, I think we can extrapolate and say that the same types of people who were outside the kingdom when it came in AD 70 are still outside the kingdom now and forever.

What do you conclude is (was) the difference in experience, and what informs your thoughts on this?


The different experience is either eternal torment, annihilation, or corrective punishment.
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Mon Dec 21, 2015 8:41 pm

I am enjoying this interchange!

Thanks guys !!!
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Wed Dec 23, 2015 3:48 pm

qaz wrote:…I think we can extrapolate and say that the same types of people who were outside the kingdom when it came in AD 70 are still outside the kingdom now and forever.

Ok fair enough… so then on what biblical grounds do you extrapolate such, i.e., what texts of scripture justify this for you?

qaz wrote:The different experience is either eternal torment, annihilation, or corrective punishment.

Yeah ok… BUT how have you come to set just those parameters alone? I can see the likes of “corrective punishment” in terms of THIS LIFE as they are plain in scripture, BUT beyond… again what’s your textual evidence?

As I understand it… texts that are “interpreted” along ECT lines in fact refer to Gehenna aka Jesus’ prophetic judgments relative to the AD70 DoJ. I agree 100% with “annihilation” IF and I repeat IF annihilation refers and relates purely to the physicality of man’s existence, no more no less, and as such has NO bearing beyond the physical realm… “do X and LIVE or do Y and DIE”.

IMO ‘the doctrine’ of “annihilationism” as typically understood is as biblically bereft as “infernalism” – and BOTH share the same base belief of a torturous hades postmortem; the ONLY difference after this is an one’s end destiny. BOTH IMO are as corrupt as the other.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Wed Dec 23, 2015 3:59 pm

Questions for Dave and Gaz:


    Why does annihilation need to be painful? Suppose God becomes all-in-all and and folks experience God's love, according to the Eastern Orthodox view of states of being. Maybe folks experience God's love and bliss - before ceasing to exist. Much like taking a drug and feeling good - but having an overdose (i.e. similar to the "artificial" reality in the Matrix movies).
Last edited by Holy-Fool-P-Zombie on Wed Dec 23, 2015 7:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Eastern Anglo-Catholic / Holy Fool; Inclusivism / Purgatorial Conditionalism / Nicene Creed / ACNA; Theosis; Zombie Apocalypse;
Contemplation (Mindfulness, Fox Golden Key, Yoga); Healing (Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Kampo, Bruno Gröning, Johrei, Charismatic, Čhaŋnúŋpa);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 3024
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Wed Dec 23, 2015 5:45 pm

randylkemp wrote:
    Why do we have to look at the eternal option at ETC?

Well I DON’T. I reject Catholicism’s ‘Dantēs’ Inferno’ which the reformers kept for their own machinations.

randylkemp wrote:
    Why does annihilation need to be painful?

In biblical times, and THAT’S the context of my supposition, annihilation was only as painful as to the means physical death was inflicted, e.g., lopping one’s head off with a sword… relatively painless; crucifixion or stoning… gruesomely painful.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Thu Dec 24, 2015 7:51 pm

davo wrote:Ok fair enough… so then on what biblical grounds do you extrapolate such, i.e., what texts of scripture justify this for you?


Let me ask you: do you believe the kingdom of God was only made up of Christians living in AD 70? If not, then why suppose that the types of people who were outside the kingdom in AD 70 are not outside now?

Yeah ok… BUT how have you come to set just those parameters alone? I can see the likes of “corrective punishment” in terms of THIS LIFE as they are plain in scripture, BUT beyond… again what’s your textual evidence?

As I understand it… texts that are “interpreted” along ECT lines in fact refer to Gehenna aka Jesus’ prophetic judgments relative to the AD70 DoJ. I agree 100% with “annihilation” IF and I repeat IF annihilation refers and relates purely to the physicality of man’s existence, no more no less, and as such has NO bearing beyond the physical realm… “do X and LIVE or do Y and DIE”.

IMO ‘the doctrine’ of “annihilationism” as typically understood is as biblically bereft as “infernalism” – and BOTH share the same base belief of a torturous hades postmortem; the ONLY difference after this is an one’s end destiny. BOTH IMO are as corrupt as the other.


Would heaven not be chaos if unrepentant sinners were allowed in? Didn't John write that in God there is no darkness?
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Fri Dec 25, 2015 12:08 am

qaz wrote:
davo wrote:Ok fair enough… so then on what biblical grounds do you extrapolate such, i.e., what texts of scripture justify this for you?


Let me ask you: do you believe…

Before I answer your next questions… can you PLEASE deal with mine (as I asked) and give some textual evidence for WHY you believe as you do? Not philosophical argument but scriptural texts?
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Fri Dec 25, 2015 1:21 pm

davo wrote:
qaz wrote:
davo wrote:Ok fair enough… so then on what biblical grounds do you extrapolate such, i.e., what texts of scripture justify this for you?


Let me ask you: do you believe…

Before I answer your next questions… can you PLEASE deal with mine (as I asked) and give some textual evidence for WHY you believe as you do? Not philosophical argument but scriptural texts?


I guess I can't think of any that beyond a shadow of a doubt refer to postmortem punishment and not AD 70. Now it's your turn.
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Sun Dec 27, 2015 4:42 pm

qaz wrote:Let me ask you: do you believe the kingdom of God was only made up of Christians living in AD 70?

NO.
qaz wrote:If not, then why suppose that the types of people who were outside the kingdom in AD 70 are not outside now?

Those “outside” were specific to that era in terms of the ones called or not called relative to ministering in the outworking to fullness of God’s redemptive plan… basically those clinging to the OC mode of law-righteousness.

    As a pantelist I understand…
“The Church” is NOT the “the Kingdom” – the “church” constitutes the priestly-servants OF the Kingdom.

The ‘KINGDOM’ is the DOMAIN of God – is there any place beyond the reach of God's sovereign reign? (Psa 139:7-8; Jer 23:24)

The ‘CITY / TEMPLE’ is the SPIRITUAL HUB of the kingdom – wherein the priests of God dwell. (Rev 5:9-10; 22:2)

The ‘COVENANT’ is the LANGUAGE of the kingdom – that which communicates best the Divine intents of the kingdom i.e., ‘love God by loving thy neighbour’. (Mk 12:33; Rom 13:8-10; Jas 2:8)

There are many non-citizens (non-believers) in His Kingdom – naturalised citizens (believers) are mandated to minister God's message of reconciling grace through witness and worship and works to those lacking this knowledge. The essence of evangelism per se is about bringing those “outside” in terms of knowledge of grace “inside” where the true blessedness of citizenry in this life (Rom 5:17) is found. The essence then of the Gospel is NOT about the avoidance of some supposed postmortem calamity (which seems to be the goal of most infernalists and many universalists). No, the essence of the Gospel is about finding and coming into the blessed fullness of LIFE in Christ in this life (Jn 10:10).

    Let me put it similarly…
In all probability there would be many people in the US who reject or “don’t believe in Obama” either apathetically or more contentiously, but their non-belief or rejection in no way stops Obama being THEIR ‘president’… the same rings true with some people’s attitude towards God and the FACT that HE remains by virtue of Creator/created, THEIR God.

Likewise, there are many “non-citizens” in the US living under the same relative peace therein as regular citizens. There are however benefits to “citizenship” not known by “non-citizens”. (I know that’s a less than perfect example given most ‘illegals’ would probably jump at the chance of ‘full membership’ but I’m sure you can see my point.)

Again… the CHURCH is NOT the KINGDOM, but rather the SPIRITUAL HUB of the DOMAIN of God. Remember… “the kingdom” i.e., the right to rule/serve therein, was “taken from” the “congregation in the wilderness” (Acts 7:38) and given to a new people who would accomplish what the former in faithlessness relinquished (Mt 21:43).

So… from my perspective the whole “who’s in or who’s out” had/has NOTHING to do with positions in postmortem paradise (heaven), but EVERYTHING to do with WHO has been called into SERVICE of God and as such is proactive as opposed to reactive. Jesus said… “many are called, but few are chosen” – NOT for position in heaven in the hereafter BUT for purpose in service in the here and now.

qaz wrote:Would heaven not be chaos if unrepentant sinners were allowed in?

What makes you think your “unrepentant sinners” *wouldn’t* immediately drop in a heartbeat to the knee in awe-inspired reverence at the brightness of His majesty and presence? Any latent doubt or chaos on behalf of so-called ‘unbelievers’ would evaporate in a flash, IMO.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Mon Dec 28, 2015 5:29 am

Hi David,

Nice post.

You said,
"What makes you think your “unrepentant sinners” *wouldn’t* immediately drop in a heartbeat to the knee in awe-inspired reverence at the brightness of His majesty and presence? Any latent doubt or chaos on behalf of so-called ‘unbelievers’ would evaporate in a flash, IMO."

I am in agreement there. I have kind of thought along those lines for a while.

I do have a question, could you possibly explain what a pantelist believes regarding the difference between inclusion as opposed to the idea of universalism. You've posted that idea before and I would like to hear how you explain it. I have a feeling you were touching on it above, but I might be mistaken.

Thanks
Chad
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Mon Dec 28, 2015 6:18 am

Hey Chad… :mrgreen:
maintenanceman wrote:I do have a question, could you possibly explain what a pantelist believes regarding the difference between inclusion as opposed to the idea of universalism. You've posted that idea before and I would like to hear how you explain it. I have a feeling you were touching on it above, but I might be mistaken.

How about this from earlier in the thread…

davo wrote:I’m an ‘inclusionist’ as opposed to a ‘universalist’ as in I reject the typical universalist rationales around “hell” and “the lake of fire” which for the most part are no different in essence than that held by infernalists; the only real difference between the two is the amount of torturous time said to be spent therein. I also don’t buy into the philosophical type arguments lots of universalists’ often favour… I find them weak and unconvincing. IOW, I came to inclusion via biblical eschatology NOT philosophy.

Becoming an inclusive prêterist (a pantelist) was as natural as moving from partial to full prêterism, that is, it was IMO the most natural and logical progression to take when taking prêterism to it most obvious logical conclusion, that is, I found prêterism to be inherently inclusive and as such the pantelism extrapolated to be more exegetically and “prêteristically consistent”.

Example… prêterism maintains that “the last enemy to be destroyed is death” – I agree! (BTW… this “death” was the death of Adam i.e., relational [spiritual] separation from God; that which Jesus rectified). LOGIC however dictates that IF this is so then by obvious extension GOD HAS NO MORE ENEMIES because there can be nothing more AFTER “the last” has been dealt with – that’s pretty simple AND pretty INCLUSIVE. There are of course other texts that feed into this pantelistic rationale.

I encountered a lot of heat and opposition from both Arminian (DKP) and Calvinist (Frost) prêterists… but the best they could do at the time (early to mid-2000s) was rail against my conclusions with pejorative name-slinging like “universalist!” But apart from disagree they couldn’t (can’t) refute said conclusions.

Does that make sense?
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Mon Dec 28, 2015 7:46 am

davo wrote:Hey Chad… :mrgreen:
maintenanceman wrote:I do have a question, could you possibly explain what a pantelist believes regarding the difference between inclusion as opposed to the idea of universalism. You've posted that idea before and I would like to hear how you explain it. I have a feeling you were touching on it above, but I might be mistaken.

How about this from earlier in the thread…

davo wrote:I’m an ‘inclusionist’ as opposed to a ‘universalist’ as in I reject the typical universalist rationales around “hell” and “the lake of fire” which for the most part are no different in essence than that held by infernalists; the only real difference between the two is the amount of torturous time said to be spent therein. I also don’t buy into the philosophical type arguments lots of universalists’ often favour… I find them weak and unconvincing. IOW, I came to inclusion via biblical eschatology NOT philosophy.

Becoming an inclusive prêterist (a pantelist) was as natural as moving from partial to full prêterism, that is, it was IMO the most natural and logical progression to take when taking prêterism to it most obvious logical conclusion, that is, I found prêterism to be inherently inclusive and as such the pantelism extrapolated to be more exegetically and “prêteristically consistent”.

Example… prêterism maintains that “the last enemy to be destroyed is death” – I agree! (BTW… this “death” was the death of Adam i.e., relational [spiritual] separation from God; that which Jesus rectified). LOGIC however dictates that IF this is so then by obvious extension GOD HAS NO MORE ENEMIES because there can be nothing more AFTER “the last” has been dealt with – that’s pretty simple AND pretty INCLUSIVE. There are of course other texts that feed into this pantelistic rationale.

I encountered a lot of heat and opposition from both Arminian (DKP) and Calvinist (Frost) prêterists… but the best they could do at the time (early to mid-2000s) was rail against my conclusions with pejorative name-slinging like “universalist!” But apart from disagree they couldn’t (can’t) refute said conclusions.

Does that make sense?


Hi David.
It makes sense to me.

As for myself, I came to the same conclusion as you stated above, once I 'became' a full preterist. I guess I just thought that there were possibly 'degree's' or different beliefs of universalist's. Much like partial preterist's can draw their line where ever their eschatological view dictates, universalists can see punishment / wrath in many different ways. Unitarian Universalists not withstanding, I guess I never realized there was a 'typical' belief for universalists, though it does seem most universalists do seem to believe in some sort of postmortem punishment. It also seems to me that most (I'll use the term 'evangelical') universalists believe that everyone will ultimately end up at the throne of Christ, but there are a bunch of different ideas about what happens on the way there.

So basically it is an issue of terminology imposed by ideology?

Does that make sense?

So I guess my next question is (and it may be on your web page as I have not looked at all the material there) What is the history of Pantelism?
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Mon Dec 28, 2015 8:03 am

maintenanceman wrote:So I guess my next question is (and it may be on your web page as I have not looked at all the material there) What is the history of Pantelism?


Well, Maintenance Man. I don't think there really is a "recorded, written" history. Else, I would have seen it expanded upon in the Wiki and Theopedia sources:


Of course, Davo or someone else here, might know something the experts left out.

Image
Eastern Anglo-Catholic / Holy Fool; Inclusivism / Purgatorial Conditionalism / Nicene Creed / ACNA; Theosis; Zombie Apocalypse;
Contemplation (Mindfulness, Fox Golden Key, Yoga); Healing (Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Kampo, Bruno Gröning, Johrei, Charismatic, Čhaŋnúŋpa);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 3024
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Tue Dec 29, 2015 6:06 pm

maintenanceman wrote:What is the history of Pantelism?

Pretty recent. For about 10yrs I was a partial prêterist before realising it or even much hearing the term. In 1999 I came across a couple of innocuous little footnotes (p. 264, 531) in David Chilton’s partial prêt masterpiece ‘Days of Vengeance’ referring to a Max R. King and his “insightful and frustrating” work ‘The Spirit of Prophecy’. Chilton (at that time) considered King’s ideas as “heretical” but in subsequent years before his death came to embrace the view more fully. King refers to his own prêteristic approach as ‘Covenant Eschatology’.

Having my interests summarily intrigued I jumped online and found their website and started exploring/dialoguing etc. It started to gel for me and it wasn’t too long before I grasped the implications of ‘covenant eschatology’ (full prêterism) rather excitedly exclaiming “this changes everything!”… I haven’t looked back since. For me the simple but BIG revelation came when I grasped the reality that “end of the world/age” did NOT mean THE END OF our time-space universe but rather THE END OF the Mosaic world/age of OC Judaism – THAT for me changed everything, in particular HOW I was reading NT eschatology.

Subsequent to this I started noticing a number of inclusive conclusions latent within full prêterism when it was taken to its own logical conclusions, mainly the grace of God encompassing all regardless of “professed belief”. In 2002 I put together my own website ‘pantelism.com’ promoting my inclusive prêterism, having contended for the consistent inclusive nature of prêterism much to the irascibility of my fellow prêts who kept in derision labeling me a “universalist”.

So on prêterist sites I tend to be a dirty universalist and on universalist sites an annoying prêterist! :mrgreen:

As to the moniker “pantelism”… at the time one vocal Calvinist prêterist (Sam Frost) published a book where he refutes certain anti-full prêterist assertions and arguments made by a Jonathin C. Seraiah in his book, who in criticising full prêterism refers to it in rather pejorative terms as “a pantelist interpretation” – a Gk. term meaning “all is fulfilled”. I particularly liked to term as opposed to ‘prêterist’ and found its origin in Heb 7:25 (Lk 13:11) where pantelēs <παντελὲς> (pan = all + telos = consummated) is rendered “uttermost”. From my perspective I am applying “the uttermost” or “completely” as having encompassed ALL prophetic AND redemptive history; which I understand to be the outcome of a CONSISTENT prêterism… thus pantelism.

There has been over the years a handful of folk who in gravitating to the inclusive side of prêterism likewise loosely embraced the moniker as well, although there is no fixed creed to it as such. From my perspective pantelism per se is somewhat fluid and evolving.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Tue Dec 29, 2015 8:12 pm

Well, Thank you David! I believe you are treading new waters :D :D

For me the crux of the issue is perspective, and I've lately been working on a new perspective, or what I call 'Lens'

I know a little about Chilton and DeMar, though I have gravitated towards the full preterist perspective, I admit I have some problems with Preston and Stevens, as well as some others who claim full preterism. Which is why I asked you about your inclusion posts.

I tend towards a covenant (fully realized) preterest view with an understanding that belief in Christ is still relevant today!

Which is why I found Pantelism interesting.

I did just receive Jonathin Seraiah's book, 'The End Of All Things', and look forward to reading it though I am a little at odds with R C Sproul on quite a few points... Not sure where this will land but these folks are obviously partial preterist's. Jonathin's perspective may be a tad skewed... We'll see :D

I listened and studied quite a bit of his (R C Sproul) material when I studied Calvinism, and I think he truly believes what he says, but... :roll:

No offence intended.

I am in agreement with the Idea of covenant eschatology, and I have a great expectation of God's plan and love for us in the new covenant.

Keep up the good work, though many throw rubbish at you! :D :D

Chad
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Tue Dec 29, 2015 10:14 pm

Thanks Chad! :)

maintenanceman wrote:I tend towards a covenant (fully realized) preterest view with an understanding that belief in Christ is still relevant today!

Yep I’m all for a “belief in Christ is still relevant today” view… I’ve just moved beyond ‘evangelicalism’ for my understanding in that; and prêterism aka ‘covenant eschatology’ led me in that direction. For mine I say pantelism is beyond both prêterism and universalism.

Seraiah's book 'The End Of All Things' is the one Frost responds to. I haven’t read Seraiah’s s book. Both he and Sproul are partial prêts, or as full prêts would say “inconsistent” prêterists ;). And I must admit I still have Sproul’s ‘Last Days According to Jesus’ on my shelf from 1999 having only read the first 2 chapters. :o

As for the mud-slinging… I’m in no way persecution-minded… lol, I tend to give as good as I get and I really don’t mind a bit of robust interaction, if you can believe that. :twisted:
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Wed Dec 30, 2015 3:35 pm

davo wrote:NO.

Those “outside” were specific to that era in terms of the ones called or not called relative to ministering in the outworking to fullness of God’s redemptive plan… basically those clinging to the OC mode of law-righteousness.

    As a pantelist I understand…
“The Church” is NOT the “the Kingdom” – the “church” constitutes the priestly-servants OF the Kingdom.

The ‘KINGDOM’ is the DOMAIN of God – is there any place beyond the reach of God's sovereign reign? (Psa 139:7-8; Jer 23:24)

The ‘CITY / TEMPLE’ is the SPIRITUAL HUB of the kingdom – wherein the priests of God dwell. (Rev 5:9-10; 22:2)

The ‘COVENANT’ is the LANGUAGE of the kingdom – that which communicates best the Divine intents of the kingdom i.e., ‘love God by loving thy neighbour’. (Mk 12:33; Rom 13:8-10; Jas 2:8)

There are many non-citizens (non-believers) in His Kingdom – naturalised citizens (believers) are mandated to minister God's message of reconciling grace through witness and worship and works to those lacking this knowledge. The essence of evangelism per se is about bringing those “outside” in terms of knowledge of grace “inside” where the true blessedness of citizenry in this life (Rom 5:17) is found. The essence then of the Gospel is NOT about the avoidance of some supposed postmortem calamity (which seems to be the goal of most infernalists and many universalists). No, the essence of the Gospel is about finding and coming into the blessed fullness of LIFE in Christ in this life (Jn 10:10).

    Let me put it similarly…
In all probability there would be many people in the US who reject or “don’t believe in Obama” either apathetically or more contentiously, but their non-belief or rejection in no way stops Obama being THEIR ‘president’… the same rings true with some people’s attitude towards God and the FACT that HE remains by virtue of Creator/created, THEIR God.

Likewise, there are many “non-citizens” in the US living under the same relative peace therein as regular citizens. There are however benefits to “citizenship” not known by “non-citizens”. (I know that’s a less than perfect example given most ‘illegals’ would probably jump at the chance of ‘full membership’ but I’m sure you can see my point.)

Again… the CHURCH is NOT the KINGDOM, but rather the SPIRITUAL HUB of the DOMAIN of God. Remember… “the kingdom” i.e., the right to rule/serve therein, was “taken from” the “congregation in the wilderness” (Acts 7:38) and given to a new people who would accomplish what the former in faithlessness relinquished (Mt 21:43).

So… from my perspective the whole “who’s in or who’s out” had/has NOTHING to do with positions in postmortem paradise (heaven), but EVERYTHING to do with WHO has been called into SERVICE of God and as such is proactive as opposed to reactive. Jesus said… “many are called, but few are chosen” – NOT for position in heaven in the hereafter BUT for purpose in service in the here and now.


I agree that the kingdom of heaven is not the same as heaven. I disagree that there are non-Christians in the kingdom. According to Matthew 7:21 not even all Christians will enter the kingdom. To use Psalm 139 and Jeremiah 23 as evidence of a universal kingdom is a huge stretch. Both were written way before AD 70 and seem to be describing then-present reality. For your argument to work, you'd have to posit that God was omnipresent in OT times, stopped being omnipresent for a brief period in the 1st century, and then resumed being omnipresent after AD 70. Such an idea is not scripturally supported, and IMO it's philosophically absurd.

Getting back to the issue of postmortem punishment...

In what sense do you think 1st century Christian hypocrites (those identified as the goats in Matthew 25) were eternally punished in AD 70? In what sense did charitable Christians (the sheep) receive eternal life?

Matthew 10:28 Don’t be afraid of those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul. Rather, fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna. If this isn't a reference to postmortem punishment, what's the point of it? A few lines verses later: Matthew 10:32 Everyone therefore who confesses me before men, him I will also confess before my Father who is in heaven. 33 But whoever denies me before men, him I will also deny before my Father who is in heaven. So post AD 70, people can deny Jesus and he won't deny them before the Father? Explain.

Matthew 10
38 He who doesn’t take his cross and follow after me, isn’t worthy of me. 39 He who seeks his life will lose it; and he who loses his life for my sake will find it. 40 He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives him who sent me. 41 He who receives a prophet in the name of a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward. He who receives a righteous man in the name of a righteous man will receive a righteous man’s reward. 42 Whoever gives one of these little ones just a cup of cold water to drink in the name of a disciple, most certainly I tell you he will in no way lose his reward.” What do you think it means to lose one's life/soul? And what is the reward mentioned in verse 42?

and Romans 10...
6 But the righteousness which is of faith says this, “Don’t say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down); 7 or, ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead.)” Paul is juxtaposing heaven with "the abyss". If heaven is the place of postmortem bliss, we can conclude that the abyss is a place of postmortem punishment.

What makes you think your “unrepentant sinners” *wouldn’t* immediately drop in a heartbeat to the knee in awe-inspired reverence at the brightness of His majesty and presence? Any latent doubt or chaos on behalf of so-called ‘unbelievers’ would evaporate in a flash, IMO.


I don't think there's scriptural evidence for it.
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:18 am

qaz wrote:I agree that the kingdom of heaven is not the same as heaven. I disagree that there are non-Christians in the kingdom.

It is clear I’m saying… ALL are under the DOMAIN of God, i.e., He is sovereign OVER all, regardless of belief. What then are YOU saying, please explain?

qaz wrote:According to Matthew 7:21 not even all Christians will enter the kingdom.

So what “works” would you recommend “Christians” DO to ensure peace-of-mind that they will indeed “enter the kingdom” following the narrow scope your interpretation affords?

qaz wrote:To use Psalm 139 and Jeremiah 23 as evidence of a universal kingdom is a huge stretch. Both were written way before AD 70 and seem to be describing then-present reality. For your argument to work, you'd have to posit that God was omnipresent in OT times, stopped being omnipresent for a brief period in the 1st century, and then resumed being omnipresent after AD 70. Such an idea is not scripturally supported, and IMO it's philosophically absurd.

What seems “philosophically absurd” is that you could read such an excuse of an objection back into what I’ve said as a pretence to disagreeing with me… by all means disagree BUT don’t invent rubbish and then attribute such to me – that’s “absurd”. The likes of Psa 139:7-8; Jer 23:24 stand well with the point I made and NOWHERE dates-wise on the historical clock could any of it be less other than the passing of any said place, for example… a postmortem torturous “hades” BUT which in OT parlance basically meant the grave i.e., death.

Psa 139:7-8 Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend into heaven, You are there; if I make my bed in hell, behold, You are there.

Psa 139:7-8 Can anyone hide himself in secret places, so I shall not see him?” says the Lord;
“Do I not fill heaven and earth?” says the Lord.

I’d like to see if ANYONE ELSE would agree with your bold assertion that… “Psalm 139 and Jeremiah 23 as evidence of a universal kingdom is a huge stretch.” In terms of the sovereign reach of God “a huge stretch… REALLY??

qaz wrote:In what sense do you think 1st century Christian hypocrites (those identified as the goats in Matthew 25) were eternally punished in AD 70? In what sense did charitable Christians (the sheep) receive eternal life?

QUESTION: “Have you stopped beating your wife lately… YES or NO?” – it’s a WRONG question reflecting a wrong-headed premise. The “goats” in question were Israel of the flesh (OC law righteousness). The sheep were Israel of the Spirit (NC grace)… Rom 2:29; Phil 3:3.

The EVERLASTING nature of the Parousaic “punishment” or “life” was QUALITATIVE i.e., the totality of destruction as per the ‘Roman-Jewish’ wars or the fullness life experienced “in Christ” – for a whole bunch of believers IN Jerusalem that also meant a miraculous escape right in the midst of the hostilities before the final overthrow and decimation of the Temple.

qaz wrote:
davo wrote:What makes you think your “unrepentant sinners” *wouldn’t* immediately drop in a heartbeat to the knee in awe-inspired reverence at the brightness of His majesty and presence? Any latent doubt or chaos on behalf of so-called ‘unbelievers’ would evaporate in a flash, IMO.


I don't think there's scriptural evidence for it.

Phil 2:10-11 …that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Like I said… EVERY knee will drop. And IF “those under the earth” isn’t a direct reference to the physically departed, i.e., “the dead” then I’d like to know to whom you ascribe such? IOW… there's the scriptural evidence for it!
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Fri Jan 01, 2016 1:40 pm

davo wrote:So what “works” would you recommend “Christians” DO to ensure peace-of-mind that they will indeed “enter the kingdom” following the narrow scope your interpretation affords?


I recommend Christians feed the hungry, clothe the naked, care for the ill, etc. (Matthew 25:35-36)

I recommend Christians to not do the following things:
1 Corinthians 6
9Or don’t you know that the unrighteous will not inherit God’s Kingdom? Don’t be deceived. Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexuals, 10nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor extortionists, will inherit God’s Kingdom.


I’d like to see if ANYONE ELSE would agree with your bold assertion that… “Psalm 139 and Jeremiah 23 as evidence of a universal kingdom is a huge stretch.” In terms of the sovereign reach of God “a huge stretch… REALLY??


I thought you believe the kingdom came in AD 70. If the kingdom is the same thing as "the sovereign reach of God", then the kingdom didn't come in AD 70; if the kingdom is the same thing as "the sovereign reach of God", the kingdom has not only existed since creation, it is creation.

qaz wrote:QUESTION: “Have you stopped beating your wife lately… YES or NO?” – it’s a WRONG question reflecting a wrong-headed premise. The “goats” in question were Israel of the flesh (OC law righteousness). The sheep were Israel of the Spirit (NC grace)… Rom 2:29; Phil 3:3.

The EVERLASTING nature of the Parousaic “punishment” or “life” was QUALITATIVE i.e., the totality of destruction as per the ‘Roman-Jewish’ wars or the fullness life experienced “in Christ” – for a whole bunch of believers IN Jerusalem that also meant a miraculous escape right in the midst of the hostilities before the final overthrow and decimation of the Temple.


in Matthew 25 Jesus said he would be severing nations. Wouldn't that imply that at least some of the goats were non-Jews?

davo wrote:
Phil 2:10-11 …that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Like I said… EVERY knee will drop. And IF “those under the earth” isn’t a direct reference to the physically departed, i.e., “the dead” then I’d like to know to whom you ascribe such? IOW… there's the scriptural evidence for it!


Like I said earlier (in this thread or another, I can't remember), interpreting Philippians 2:10-11 from a preterist lens while believing it offers proof that everyone will be saved is the difficulty I'm trying to reconcile. On the one hand, preterists believe all prophesy has been fulfilled. On other hand, we know that there are many people who live their entire lives without confessing that Jesus is Lord. I think preterist universalists or "pantelists" have to adjust their view of prophesy so that Philippians doesn't describe something that happened in AD 70, but an ongoing reality.

BTW you didn't address Romans 10.
6 But the righteousness which is of faith says this, “Don’t say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down); 7 or, ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead.)” If heaven is where the saved go postmortem, shouldn't we conclude "the abyss" is where the unsaved go postmortem? What do you think "the abyss" is if not a place of postmortem punishment?
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Fri Jan 01, 2016 10:35 pm

Also, Davo and maintenanceman, sorry for this somewhat off topic question, but can you guys recommend any preterist papers/books that you think best counter the idea that Matthew 16:28 was about the transfiguration?
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby davo » Sat Jan 02, 2016 5:54 pm

qaz wrote:Also, Davo and maintenanceman, sorry for this somewhat off topic question, but can you guys recommend any preterist papers/books that you think best counter the idea that Matthew 16:28 was about the transfiguration?

Nothing comes ‘immediately’ to mind but I’m sure Don K. Preston on youtube probably covers it somewhere.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Sat Jan 02, 2016 6:09 pm

davo wrote:
qaz wrote:Also, Davo and maintenanceman, sorry for this somewhat off topic question, but can you guys recommend any preterist papers/books that you think best counter the idea that Matthew 16:28 was about the transfiguration?

Nothing comes ‘immediately’ to mind but I’m sure Don K. Preston on youtube probably covers it somewhere.


Hey qaz,

Time to jump into the water yourself... There is mucho info about all this all over the internet, but to be honest, a dozen really good folks can tell you truth but if you do not want to look at it, to be honest, there is nothing to be gained. A paradigm shift has to happen. It is as simple as that.

Hope the best for you :D

Chad
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:53 pm

maintenanceman wrote:Hey qaz,

Time to jump into the water yourself... There is mucho info about all this all over the internet, but to be honest, a dozen really good folks can tell you truth but if you do not want to look at it, to be honest, there is nothing to be gained. A paradigm shift has to happen. It is as simple as that.

Hope the best for you :D

Chad


I have jumped into the water. I've already said I'm a preterist. The fact that I continuously question my beliefs (not just on eschatology) and ask for recommended reading material doesn't mean I don't want to look at it. If I didn't want to look at it I wouldn't be asking for it.
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Sun Jan 03, 2016 5:45 am

Hi qaz,

That is my point, that the preterist perspective is a process of study. It does not come easy but don't let that shake your belief.

I would say that we should not question our beliefs, but question the things that would challenge our beliefs. If in fact, when you take a view, (in this case the preterist view), then you either believe it (it is your belief) consider it (you question it but it does not shake your belief until you are convinced through the HS that you will adopt it as a belief) or you consider it not to be regarded as to your belief system.

As to the text which you talked about, I found five different papers on the subject within about two minutes.

Here is Preston's take on it.

Written by Don K. Preston

MATTHEW 16:28
FULFILLED AT THE TRANSFIGURATION?

Don K. Preston

"Very I say unto you, there are some standing here that shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."



Matthew 16:27-28 continues to be a source of great consternation to Bible students. Jesus’ emphatic statement about the time of his coming, the judgment and the kingdom challenges all futurist eschatologies. The number of "explanations" that have been offered to mitigate the power of Jesus’ words is amazing. Most of these explanations are so patently ridiculous that one has to wonder at the desperation of traditionalists who make them. See my book Can You Believe Jesus Said This? for a discussion and refutation of the leading objections to Jesus’ prediction. That book is available from this website.



The most common objection to Jesus’ straightforward words is that his prediction was fulfilled just eight days later in the Transfiguration vision. We are told that the Transfiguration fulfilled Jesus’ prediction, but, that in fact, his parousia– that which was predicted in Matthew 16:28 will occur at the end of the current Christian age.



So, what this means is that Matthew 16:28 was not actually fulfilled in the Transfiguration at all. It was a visionary forecast of the true fulfillment. It is even widely admitted that the Transfiguration was not the event itself that Jesus predicted but was somehow a typological, or symbolic vision of the fulfillment of what Jesus predicted.



Think about that for a moment. This means that Jesus was saying, "There are some standing here that shall not taste death until they see a vision of the yet future coming of the son of Man." This will not work, especially in light of Mark 9:1. When one examines the Greek of the text, notice the literal translation: "Verily I say to you, That there are certain of those standing here, who may not taste of death till they see the reign of God having come in power" (Young’s Literal. Notice also the RSV and other translations).



In other words, some standing there that day would not die until they saw that the coming of the Son of Man in the kingdom had come in power! They would live until that event. They would live through that event. They would look back on the fulfillment of Jesus’ words.



Jesus was not saying, "Some standing here will not taste of death until they see a vision of the future coming." He said, "There are some standing here that shall not taste of death until they see that the kingdom of God after it has come with power" (NASB). The literal Greek of Mark totally dispels and destroys the idea of the Transfiguration being the fulfillment of Jesus’ prediction.



Jesus’ words "Some standing here" demands that the majority of those standing there would die before the parousia. The event he was predicting was to be sufficiently far off temporally that most of that audience would die, but some would survive to see his coming. Did only a handful of that multitude survive the next eight days until the Transfiguration? This "explanation" of Jesus’ prediction is patently false on this fact alone, but, this is not nearly all.

Notice that only three men– three men!!– witnessed the Transfiguration. So, what we are being told is that Jesus, standing in the midst of a huge multitude, said "Some standing here will not die until the see the Son of Man coming" and what he meant by that was that "three of you standing here will not die until they see me coming." By the very nature of the case, this argument falls because it is so ludicrous.



It is argued that Peter’s referent to the Transfiguration in 2 Peter 1:16 proves that Matthew 16:28 was fulfilled on the Mount. But this simply is not true. (See my in-depth study of the Transfiguration in my The Elements Shall Melt With Fervent Heat, available on this website. The Transfiguration proves that the parousia was truly imminent in the first century, and was to be fulfilled in the fall of Jerusalem).



Peter did appeal to the Transfiguration as a vision of the parousia. Of this there can be no doubt. And, he even said that that Transfiguration made the prophetic word more sure. But, he did not say that the Transfiguration fulfilled Jesus prediction in Matthew 16:28! To claim that Peter did say this is a gross mis-use of 2 Peter 1:16f.



Finally, it is argued that the Transfiguration proves that the Lord is to come at the end of the current (Christian) age. Nothing could be more false!



Now, it is true that the Transfiguration was a vision of the end of an age, of this there can be no doubt. But, of what age was the Transfiguration a vision of the impending or future end? It patently was not the Christian age. The Christian age has no end, so this fact alone destroys the argument, but, the Transfiguration vision itself defines the end that was to end.



What really happened on the Mount? Did the disciples witness a visionary end to planet earth? Did the see a vision of the end of time? Nothing in the vision even remotely suggests such a thing. Did they witness the end of the Gospel? Well, since Jesus said that his word– and thus the gospel age– will never pass away (Matthew 25:35) it is patently wrong to suggest that they saw such a thing. So, what did the disciples see? What age ended in the Transfiguration vision?



We have only to remember that in the vision, Moses and Elijah– who do not by any stretch of the imagination represent the current Christian age– appeared to Jesus. In his enthusiasm, Peter wanted to establish three tabernacles in honor of Moses, Elijah and Jesus. But what happened? Moses and Elijah vanished away, and the voice from heaven, the Bath Qol, said "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, hear ye him!"



What happened on the Mount was that the disciples saw a vision of the passing of the Old Covenant age of Moses and Elijah! If the claim that Matthew 16:28 was fulfilled in the Transfiguration is true, then the vision itself does not match. The disciples should have seen Jesus fade away. Instead, they saw a vision of the establishment of the age and word of Jesus! The glory of Christ was established– not terminated– in the vision. The New Covenant age was depicted as transcendent over Moses and Elijah. The Transfiguration was not, in any way whatsoever, a vision of the passing of the current Christian age. Those who claim that the Transfiguration was a vision of the end of the Christian age must be able to show how and why the vanishing of Moses and Elijah represented and communicated the idea of the end of the Christian age. This cannot be done.



What all of this means, and I present much, much more in my book Can You Believe Jesus Said This?, proves beyond any doubt that Jesus’ prediction in Matthew 16:28 was not fulfilled, typologically or in vision form, on the Mount of Transfiguration. That mountain top vision did confirm Jesus prophetic word as more sure, but, it did not fulfill his prophecy. The fulfillment of his words took place at the end of the age of Moses and Elijah, and that was at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. The futurist "explanation" of Matthew 16:28 is false.




There are a couple of different books of his he mentions in this article. Hope this helps.

Chad
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Sun Jan 03, 2016 10:20 am

I've read that article by Preston several times. I'll add my comments in red.

maintenanceman wrote:MATTHEW 16:28
FULFILLED AT THE TRANSFIGURATION?

Don K. Preston

"Very I say unto you, there are some standing here that shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

Matthew 16:27-28 continues to be a source of great consternation to Bible students. Jesus’ emphatic statement about the time of his coming, the judgment and the kingdom challenges all futurist eschatologies. The number of "explanations" that have been offered to mitigate the power of Jesus’ words is amazing. Most of these explanations are so patently ridiculous that one has to wonder at the desperation of traditionalists who make them. See my book Can You Believe Jesus Said This? for a discussion and refutation of the leading objections to Jesus’ prediction. That book is available from this website.

The most common objection to Jesus’ straightforward words is that his prediction was fulfilled just eight days later in the Transfiguration vision. We are told that the Transfiguration fulfilled Jesus’ prediction, but, that in fact, his parousia– that which was predicted in Matthew 16:28 will occur at the end of the current Christian age.

So, what this means is that Matthew 16:28 was not actually fulfilled in the Transfiguration at all. It was a visionary forecast of the true fulfillment. It is even widely admitted that the Transfiguration was not the event itself that Jesus predicted but was somehow a typological, or symbolic vision of the fulfillment of what Jesus predicted.

Think about that for a moment. This means that Jesus was saying, "There are some standing here that shall not taste death until they see a vision of the yet future coming of the son of Man." This will not work, especially in light of Mark 9:1. When one examines the Greek of the text, notice the literal translation: "Verily I say to you, That there are certain of those standing here, who may not taste of death till they see the reign of God having come in power" (Young’s Literal. Notice also the RSV and other translations).

In other words, some standing there that day would not die until they saw that the coming of the Son of Man in the kingdom had come in power! They would live until that event. They would live through that event. They would look back on the fulfillment of Jesus’ words.

Jesus was not saying, "Some standing here will not taste of death until they see a vision of the future coming." He said, "There are some standing here that shall not taste of death until they see that the kingdom of God after it has come with power" (NASB). The literal Greek of Mark totally dispels and destroys the idea of the Transfiguration being the fulfillment of Jesus’ prediction. I'm not following Preston's logic. How does the fact that Mark writes "come in power" necessarily mean Jesus couldn't have been referring to the transfiguration?

Jesus’ words "Some standing here" demands that the majority of those standing there would die before the parousia. The event he was predicting was to be sufficiently far off temporally that most of that audience would die , but some would survive to see his coming (This is an assumption). Did only a handful of that multitude survive the next eight days until the Transfiguration? Where does the Bible say there were men standing there that didn't die between then and the transfiguration? This "explanation" of Jesus’ prediction is patently false on this fact alone, but, this is not nearly all.

Notice that only three men– three men!!– witnessed the Transfiguration. So, what we are being told is that Jesus, standing in the midst of a huge multitude, said "Some standing here will not die until the see the Son of Man coming" and what he meant by that was that "three of you standing here will not die until they see me coming." By the very nature of the case, this argument falls because it is so ludicrous.

It is argued that Peter’s referent to the Transfiguration in 2 Peter 1:16 proves that Matthew 16:28 was fulfilled on the Mount. But this simply is not true. (See my in-depth study of the Transfiguration in my The Elements Shall Melt With Fervent Heat, available on this website. The Transfiguration proves that the parousia was truly imminent in the first century, and was to be fulfilled in the fall of Jerusalem).

Peter did appeal to the Transfiguration as a vision of the parousia. Of this there can be no doubt. And, he even said that that Transfiguration made the prophetic word more sure. But, he did not say that the Transfiguration fulfilled Jesus prediction in Matthew 16:28! Preston argued that "come in power" is a phrase that wouldn't be used to describe the transfiguration, but Peter uses almost that exact language in 2 Peter when he recounts the transfiguration: For we did not follow cunningly devised fables, when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.To claim that Peter did say this is a gross mis-use of 2 Peter 1:16f.


There are a couple of different books of his he mentions in this article. Hope this helps.


Yeah, I won't be paying $9+ for a 20-page 4.25 x 5.5 stapleback booklet.
http://www.amazon.com/Can-Believe-Jesus ... id+This%3F
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby pilgrim » Sun Jan 03, 2016 12:02 pm

Preston says:
He said, "There are some standing here that shall not taste of death until they see that the kingdom of God after it has come with power" (NASB).


I don't get that. The NASB says: “Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” - which is entirely consistent with the idea that this 'seeing' was literally and completely fulfilled in the very next chapter with the transfiguration.
I have to ask myself why Preston is so unbalanced in his determination not to see this as a perfectly reasonable POSSIBILITY. All I can deduce is that perhaps preterism will fail if Matt 16:28 can have an alternative interpretation and so he cannot allow himself to even consider that interpretation?

Me thinks he protesteth too much - and that in itself speaks volumes.
the unexamined life is not worth living - Socrates
User avatar
pilgrim
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 12:26 pm
Location: East Yorkshire, England

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Sun Jan 03, 2016 1:49 pm

Hi pilgrim,

I guess the simple answer is that all the things it says will happen in Mat 16:27-28 did not happen at the account of the transfiguration. But there is a historical case that (concerning the Matthew 27-28 verse imagery) can be made in regards to the siege of Jerusalem and the destroying of the temple around 70AD. And the simplest of all answers is that Christ was going (in regard to the transfiguration), not coming back. A voice came down from heaven, but the Christ did not. :D

Once again, matter of perspective. I tend to view it this way.

Thanks,

Chad
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby pilgrim » Sun Jan 03, 2016 3:42 pm

A very gracious reply Chad. Thank you and God bless you in 2016.

As for my view on preterism in general, I think Eaglesway summed it up well in post 447 here:
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=6656&view=unread#unread

-and I think it is a really pessimistic view, what with the world being in such a terrible state but I love your Spirit and work for the Lord.


P.S. I've been curious for a while, who/what is your avatar?
Last edited by pilgrim on Sun Jan 03, 2016 3:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
the unexamined life is not worth living - Socrates
User avatar
pilgrim
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 12:26 pm
Location: East Yorkshire, England

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Sun Jan 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Thanks pilgrim!

Hope you have a very, very good year! God Bless you and yours. I'm sure we will talk soon! :D

Chad
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby pilgrim » Sun Jan 03, 2016 3:49 pm

Sorry Chad - just edited the above whilst you were replying (oops).
the unexamined life is not worth living - Socrates
User avatar
pilgrim
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 12:26 pm
Location: East Yorkshire, England

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Sun Jan 03, 2016 3:53 pm

pilgrim, my avatar is 'Red Will Danaher' from the movie 'The Quiet Man'.

My favorite movie of all time! I think it was 1952. John Wayne and John Ford at their best in my humble opinion. Thanks for asking!! I wondered how long it would take for someone to ask :D

Best wishes,

Chad
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:03 pm

pilgrim,

We are all in a sense preterists, in that preter means past, We all know of Christ whom was born of a virgin, lived, was crucified on a cross, died and was buried, and rose again, and ascended into heaven. All has happened.

I personally believe in a full preterist view, (and thus) an understanding that Christ did all that He set out to do is actually good news!!

I totally understand the hesitance of going down that road, but I have no problem with other views. To be honest, I'm not a very good debater, I'm a musician and a fixer of things, not a theologian. I have opinions, but know others do to!

I hope that helps.

Chad
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:05 pm

maintenanceman wrote:pilgrim, my avatar is 'Red Will Danaher' from the movie 'The Quiet Man'.

My favorite movie of all time! I think it was 1952. John Wayne and John Ford at their best in my humble opinion. Thanks for asking!! I wondered how long it would take for someone to ask :D

Best wishes,

Chad


For me, it is the Maltese Falcon.

Image

I can recall all the main characters now :!:

Image
Eastern Anglo-Catholic / Holy Fool; Inclusivism / Purgatorial Conditionalism / Nicene Creed / ACNA; Theosis; Zombie Apocalypse;
Contemplation (Mindfulness, Fox Golden Key, Yoga); Healing (Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Kampo, Bruno Gröning, Johrei, Charismatic, Čhaŋnúŋpa);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 3024
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby qaz » Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:18 pm

pilgrim wrote:A very gracious reply Chad. Thank you and God bless you in 2016.

As for my view on preterism in general, I think Eaglesway summed it up well in post 447 here:
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=6656&view=unread#unread

-and I think it is a really pessimistic view, what with the world being in such a terrible state but I love your Spirit and work for the Lord.


Pessimistic? How is preterism more pessimistic than futurism?

And when you say the world is in such a terrible state, are you saying you think there was a time when things were better? A "lost paradise"? If so, when?
qaz
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:24 pm

Thanx Randy!! :D
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:27 pm

qaz wrote:
And when you say the world is in such a terrible state, are you saying you think there was a time when things were better? A "lost paradise"? If so, when?


Sure there was. It was the time folks would embrace both John Calvin theologically and Arthur Schopenhauer philosophically. :lol:
Eastern Anglo-Catholic / Holy Fool; Inclusivism / Purgatorial Conditionalism / Nicene Creed / ACNA; Theosis; Zombie Apocalypse;
Contemplation (Mindfulness, Fox Golden Key, Yoga); Healing (Ayurveda, Homeopathy, Kampo, Bruno Gröning, Johrei, Charismatic, Čhaŋnúŋpa);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 3024
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: On Preterism, the Second Coming and Hell

Postby maintenanceman » Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:46 pm

:D
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

PreviousNext

Return to Dr. Richard Beck

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest