The Evangelical Universalist Forum

70 AD- calling you Davo

You really haven’t worked and thought through the implications of your own position… your own position is that redemption ISN’T complete UNTIL Christ’s parousia. All I’m saying is… “YEAH, and my position has that parousia as done!” THEREFORE redemption IS complete. So, in FACT, it is your own lack of parousia that has YOUR position denuding the Cross of its power, i.e., it is your position that is truly the one being…
NOT enough for mankind’s complete redemption”.

Pantelism understands the AD30-70 event, i.e., Christ’s cross and parousia were bookends to God’s ONE-time salvific intervention into human history that ultimately covered and made provision for all.

IOW… the Cross was God’s DECISIVE event with the Parousia being God’s CULMINATING event.

?

Our redemption was complete at the cross, before we were born: at the cross, we were all “bought at a price” (1 Cor. 6:20).

…Nevertheless, you and I are BOTH still waiting for “the redemption of our bodies (Romans 8:23). The complete manifestation of our redemption is something still future, yet we hope for it in faith and perseverance, trusting that God is faithful to His word, and that the promised glory will be a reality.

Or do you consider your body to be already glorified, Davo? :open_mouth:

Blessings.

My concern was with the issue of future & post mortem punishment, or the denial thereof, as it relates to Pantelism.

Debating the various views of the future - Post, Pre & A-Millenialism, Preterism etc - don’t hold much interest. Why bother.

I suppose all 99% of Christians would need to hear about it is the following before dismissing it entirely & never looking back:

"“Pantelism, is a recent term in Christian eschatology that refers to what some see as an extension of Full Preterism. This view maintains that the Scriptures both prophetically and redemptively, were entirely fulfilled in the person and work of Christ and consummated at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Accordingly, this consummation included not only Christ’s Second Coming, but the final judgment, the resurrection of the just and the unjust…”

You can’t with any legitimacy claim ‘1 Cor. 6:20’ was saying that ‘redemption was complete’ AND THEN slip in a qualifying… “The complete manifestation of our redemption is something still future” — that is NOWHERE in any text. If redemption is complete, it is complete, period. That you misconstrue Rom 8:23 doesn’t justify this bob-each-way claim.

Paul says… “the redemption of our body” — for the pantelist this is to be understood in terms of the ‘collective body politic’ — the Greek text is in the singular, NOT plural. The ‘body’ that was being redeemed, i.e., a change at that time in progress, was the covenant body of Israel… from OLD covenant to NEW covenant. And THAT is the understanding of the 1Cor 15 passages you likewise misconstrue.

The pantelist understanding of Romans 8 has nothing to do with the physical time-space creation… this passage is about “the creature” Israel, and her redemption, i.e., covenant renewal aka resurrection:

No… viewed from the pantelist position the 1Cor 15 passage is not speaking of you or me, and NOT speaking of “physical bodies in postmortem resurrection”. 1Cor 15 is all about Israel being raised up out of ‘the body of death’ aka the old covenant INTO ‘the body of Christ’ aka the new covenant.

Israel was sown in a natural body of *dishonour *and weakness — Judaism = corruption

Israel was being raised in a spiritual body of glory and power — Christianity = incorruption

Incorruption was being put off. When the last vestiges of were corruption were gone, i.e., the destruction of Jerusalem and Temple in Christ’s AD70 Parousia THEN came to fulfillment “death is defeated.”

The veracity of this understanding is backed up by the parsing of each and every “it is sown / it is raised” in the passage where EACH ONE is rendered in the present tense — an action in progress — thus “it is being sown” AND “it is being raised”. This was akin to Paul’s “putting off the old man” dying to self and thus being raised to newness of life, aka “putting on the new man” — putting on the new creation (new Israel) aka “the Israel of God” etc, etc.

This is the problem from your point of view, as with many who believe God’s word was lost because of Adam, consequently developing over time until finally being revealed in Jesus. However, this is not the case at all. In fact, it is quite the opposite. God’s word began with Adam in the garden wherein he tested it and found it to be true. He then passed it on to his children, who passed it on to their children and so on and so forth.

Israel was not sown in corruption as you state, rather it was sown in righteousness, the righteousness of Abraham and those that came before him, as it says here

These people were given the same instructions, the same word, that Jesus taught. As Jesus Himself said, His words were not His but his Father’s, meaning they were not only God’s words, but the words of the forefathers. These words were what the nation of Israel was founded on, as it says in Joshua 21:43-45 "So the Lord gave Israel all the land which He had sworn to give to their fathers and they took possession of it and dwelt in it. The lord gave them rest all around, according to all that he had sworn to their fathers. And not a man of all their enemies stood against them; the Lord delivered all their enemies into their hand. Not a word failed of any good thing which the Lord had spoken to the house of Israel. All came to pass.

As in the parable of the wheat and the tares, the “law” entered in via man.
Isaiah 5:4 "And now O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge between Me and My vineyard what more was there to do for My vineyard that I have not done in it? Why when I expected it to produce good grapes did it produce worthless ones?

Could be, in fact I originally naturally took whole creation to mean humanity, and I don’t really have an issue with that but to say thematically applying it to Israel makes more sense IMO. The passage is the contrast between the creature/creation Israel and the firstfruits (sons/children of God in Christ) elected to bring to fruition the redemption… that which they were the firstfruits thereof, i.e., Israel. This then follows Paul’s same… “and so all Israel (whole creation) will be saved (redeemed).”

Ultimately what God is doing in the biblical story for the wider creation of humanity He is doing FIRST for His Creature Israel… “to the Jew first and then the Greek” etc. I tend to think a goodly portion of “the world” language speaks to and of Israel’s world, such as Jn 3:16 and 1Jn 2:2. That is not to say such can’t have application beyond, BUT I think the evangelical trend of reading ourselves directly into everything INSTEAD OF seeing such as applying secondarily as the divinely intended beneficiaries; this I tend to think can at times miss and mess with the text… but that’s just my opinion.

As I showed earlier in this thread, according to the pantelist position… the likes of Paul’s words elsewhere show the extent and reach of Israel’s redemption to be the divinely intended catalyst and prerequisite to securing humanity’s reconciliation, i.e., it was ALWAYS God’s plan for all…

Thus did Israel’s redemption reconcile the world — to quote somebody really important… “it is finished!

This is the problem from my point of view with so many of your posts… I have to spend way too much time undoing or correcting what you say I’m saying, when I’m NOT saying what you say I’m saying. :open_mouth:

Maybe we could ask, what, if any, verses talk about salvation not connected to the first century destruction of the temple by the Romans :open_mouth:

Then we should talk about the word reconciliation as opposed to salvation in the general evangelical notion of this idea of after life.???

Yes of course… context is important. In this light have a look… HERE.

This is how pantelism views these things… HERE.

The way I see it, parousias were happening all the time. The Garden of Eden fell, Noah and the flood, the Tower of Babel collapsed, Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, the Israelites were brought out of Egypt, Samson ripped down Temple, etc. etc. etc. In fact, the Temple was destroyed and rebuilt many times. As I mentioned before, these are reoccurring events.

Not as such, but if that is your understanding I’m not going to argue with it.

Why can’t I? I am arguing that this is precisely what the Scriptures themselves are indicating!

In the Old Testament redemption was the process of buying something back. The Hebrew word for Redeemer is Ga’al, and means to ransom, to play the role of a kinsman. The kinsman, someone of the same family would redeem or pay what his relative could not. In the book of Ruth, Boaz was the kinsman-redeemer for Ruth whose husband died (Ruth 2:1). Ruth was destitute, she along with her mother-in-law were forced to beg for their survival, by gleaning the fields of Boaz. Ruth had no idea of what her redemption meant.

Mankind was sold into slavery in the Garden of Eden. Adam, God’s representative for mankind, had been given full authority and possession of the earth (Genesis 1:28-30). Everything belonged to him. He transferred this birthright to Satan when he ate from the tree that God instructed him not to (Genesis 2:16-17). According to the Law of the Kinsman Redeemer, only a relative could redeem or purchase back that which was lost or sold. In other words, mankind was the only one who could provide this redemption. This is why Jesus came in the flesh, fully God and fully man (Isaiah 59:16, John 1:14). Jesus became our brother so Adam and all mankind could be redeemed ( Hebrews 2:11).

The redemption price has been paid by Jesus, but the process is not complete: our bodies, the earth, and the rest of creation have yet to fully manifest the benefits of the redemption, even to be immortalized.

Because! What if I am right about the truth of futurism? Although I am an evangelical universalist, hell and the lake of fire are long and painful; let alone the suffering in this life that results from ignorance and deception.

Take “Antichrist,” for example:

“But be alert at all times, praying that you may have strength to escape all these things that are going to take place and to stand before the Son of Man.” Luke 21:36.

Preterism & Pantelism remain a concern to me re future punishment, as they seem to often lead people to either minimalize or eliminate it completely. Is that your issue with Pantelism? I’m not clear on your point re the antichrist quote. Generally speaking my focus is on Jesus Christ.

Just a footnote here - from Wiki at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantelism

Again, this sentence is important:

I think Hermano was referring to a variation of Pascal’s wager - regarding futurism (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager).

And yet, Geoffrey was a traditional Eastern Orthodox church member. Yet I’m not aware of anything in Eastern Orthodoxy…or the historical church fathers…that supports his “ultra-universalism”. Correct me if I’m wrong. And if his theory is right, then I could be a Hell’s Angel or Outlaw gang member - all my life. And it wouldn’t make any difference. :smiley:

My point about the Antichrist is this: he is the next prophetic sign.

I believe he will soon arise in a time of world crisis, as an underestimated leader (a “little horn”) who will militarily “knock heads together” and then lead the world into an unprecedented age of peace and prosperity.

“Peace” cannot be taken from the earth (Rev. 6:4) unless the earth first becomes peaceful. I believe the pre-Trib rapture (possibly the first of several raptures) is a rescue from what will come on the world after the party balloon is finally popped, when Jesus breaks the first seal on that title deed scroll (Rev. 6:1), and begins the eviction process against Satan. And, *the devil will not go quietly. *

Origen, I am concerned about Jesus’ warning to us found in the parable of the virgins:

Blessings.

Hermano wrote:

You seem to be following many before you who have prophesied the same thing about the antichrist and end of the world…:laughing: (and it will not happen!) You are not looking at who the bible is about and written to and also when it was written, and wanting to shove your own ideas into the mix. Good luck with that. :laughing: When the time passes that you all think IT will happen you all say OH WELL :open_mouth: We have got to get back to biblical sanity. :blush:

What is your understanding of the virgins parable, Hermano?

As long as shit disturber Trump is around i don’t see there being peace. If he is a big horn, then who in Asia might be “a little horn”?

Re “hell and the lake of fire are long and painful; let alone the suffering in this life that results from ignorance and deception”, how does a view that God wouldn’t swat a fly in this life, (let alone terminate Sodom, Pharoah or Noah’s world) harmonize or reconcile with the view of Him assigning His created beings to a “hell and the lake of fire” that are “long and painful”? What Scripture says such is “long and painful”?

Well yeah that’s ok… I can play that game. Your original ill-informed argument that… According to Davo’s recommended web site on pantelism, the Cross alone was NOT enough for mankind’s complete redemption was and is completely false AND nonsensical GIVEN you then admitted your own position’s contradiction when you said… The complete manifestation of our redemption is something still future,… — IF that in itself isn’t an incomplete redemption then I don’t know what is. Can you not you see your bogus charge falls flat via your own contradiction?

The ONLY difference then between pertinent pantelism and fabulous futurism is THE LENGTH of post-cross and pre-parousia TIME. Your position has pushed that period of time out into the indefinite never-never of ever-evolving speculation; whereas my position views that same post-cross / pre-parousia period of time, where redemption was in its “process” (see we agree :stuck_out_tongue:), as being the New Testament’s 40yr period AD30-70 period of Jesus’ prophesied “this generation” where some in Israel (to whom Jesus was ACTUALLY speaking) would… “not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His Kingdom.Mt 16:28. IF that period of time STILL remains THEN logic dictates there MUST STILL BE some very, very old people ALIVE to whom Jesus spoke STILL waiting to… “see the Son of Man coming in His Kingdom.” — good going!