Free Seattle

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by coksiw

I yet have to see the news that there are lots of empty coffins. Preterism is one of the most damaging heresy in the Apostolic groups. Once you start allegorizing the Scripture, there is not limit.

You do not even understand what full preterists teach to say this. So, in effect, you are making a strawman argument. They do not believe there are empty graves. Brother, it is "Christian" to know what a person actually believes before you assume the wrong thing and attack what they do not even believe. So, in effect, your words are totally meaningless and unreliable since you did not even go about checking their beliefs before spouting off a severe accusation that does not even apply to them. And if you failed to do that properly, what can we think about anything you say about the entire issue? You already confused me with that same belief which is not the case. Now you are accusing full preterists of things they patently do not believe, like empty coffins since AD70.


Sorry, but those who cannot even check things out properly before accusing are not worth listening to about anything else. What else did they get wrong about another belief before they attacked that other belief? Who are you?

You said it is heresy and YOU DID NOT EVEN KNOW THEIR PROPER UNDERSTANDING! Wow!

Look, take a break and learn about these beliefs before you jump on here and make more of a fool of yourself. like you just did.

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by mfblume

You do not even understand what full preterists teach to say this. So, in effect, you are making a strawman argument. They do not believe there are empty graves. Brother, it is "Christian" to know what a person actually believes before you assume the wrong thing and attack what they do not even believe. So, in effect, your words are totally meaningless and unreliable since you did not even go about checking their beliefs before spouting off a severe accusation that does not even apply to them. And if you failed to do that properly, what can we think about anything you say about the entire issue? You already confused me with that same belief which is not the case. Now you are accusing full preterists of things they patently do not believe, like empty coffins since AD70.


Sorry, but those who cannot even check things out properly before accusing are not worth listening to about anything else. What else did they get wrong about another belief before they attacked that other belief? Who are you?

You said it is heresy and YOU DID NOT EVEN KNOW THEIR PROPER UNDERSTANDING! Wow!

Look, take a break and learn about these beliefs before you jump on here and make more of a fool of yourself. like you just did.

Preterism comes in different flavors. I don't know what kind you are. However, please let me ask you a question regarding the verse I posted earlier "saying that the resurrection is already past". Was Paul referring to the resurrection in 70AD or the one after the Millenium? Let's call it the "Paul-Tim resurrection". Is the Paul-Tim resurrection a past event to you?

You seem offended for my post addressed to MTD, and I apologize. I should have remembered that full preterist believe in a spiritual resurrection. I haven't dealt with them in person in a while. All I remember is a large spectrum of believes where the core problem is the lack of consistency in Biblical interpretation. They have the same spirit behind the Alexandrian school of thoughts. How much they allegorize is what determines their place in the spectrum between full and partial.

I wasn't trying to start a discussion with you about preterism. I was answering first diakonos question, and then making a comment to MTD. Like I said, preterism of any kind have a key issue that makes discussion fruitless: they don't have a consistent hermeneutics, they allegorize the Scripture in the places where a gramatical interpretation doesn't fit their view.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by coksiw

Preterism comes in different flavors.

If you studied it out you would know that the brethren here do not believe any graves were emptied.

I don't know what kind you are.

And you could have asked before you spoke.

However, please let me ask you a question regarding the verse I posted earlier "saying that the resurrection is already past". Was Paul referring to the resurrection in 70AD or the one after the Millenium? Let's call it the "Paul-Tim resurrection". Is the Paul-Tim resurrection a past event to you?

I already told you that I do not believe a resurrection occurred in AD70. The resurrection Paul spoke about is FUTURE and is OUR resurrection that we await. THE LAST ONE ever to occur, btw.

You seem offended for my post addressed to MTD, and I apologize.

I was not offended because it did not apply to me.

I should have remembered that full preterist believe in a spiritual resurrection. I haven't dealt with them in person in a while. All I remember is a large spectrum of believes where the core problem is the lack of consistency in Biblical interpretation.

Everyone says that about a belief they disagree with, though.

They have the same spirit behind the Alexandrian school of thoughts. How much they allegorize is what determines their place in the spectrum between full and partial.

I wasn't trying to start a discussion with you about preterism. I was answering first diakonos question, and then making a comment to MTD. Like I said, preterism of any kind have a key issue that makes discussion fruitless: they don't have a consistent hermeneutics, they allegorize the Scripture in the places where a gramatical interpretation doesn't fit their view.

I am partial preterist and I see a spiritual reference in prophecy, predominantly Revelation, where the rest of the bible uses that same picture as spiritual and not literal.

Rev 1:1 stated it as all symbolic, and yet the points that are not, like the timeframes of soon and at hand, that are noted outside a vision, are taken spiritually by futurists. It's exactly the opposite of what the book itself says.

Your view is a recent one that started in 1830. Dispensationalism is an utter embarrassment, bro.

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by mfblume

If you studied it out you would know that the brethren here do not believe any graves were emptied.




And you could have asked before you spoke.



I already told you that I do not believe a resurrection occurred in AD70. The resurrection Paul spoke about is FUTURE and is OUR resurrection that we await. THE LAST ONE ever to occur, btw.

I was not offended because it did not apply to me.



Everyone says that about a belief they disagree with, though.



I am partial preterist and I see a spiritual reference in prophecy, predominantly Revelation, where the rest of the bible uses that same picture as spiritual and not literal.

Rev 1:1 stated it as all symbolic, and yet the points that are not, like the timeframes of soon and at hand, that are noted outside a vision, are taken spiritually by futurists. It's exactly the opposite of what the book itself says.

Your view is a recent one that started in 1830. Dispensationalism is an utter embarrassment, bro.

In Revelation, symbols are tools of the languages. Many of the symbols are explained in the book itself, and they tell you what they represent.
They are not to be interpreted as allegories of events that will not historically happen. Daniel is a book that can be used to understand how to interpret Revelation. There is no allegories in Daniel interpretation, but symbols representing historical events.

A great example of the right interpretation of symbolic dreams is the case of Joseph's dream:

[Gen 37:10 KJV] 10 And he told [it] to his father, and to his brethren: and his father rebuked him, and said unto him, What [is] this dream that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth?

Notice that Jacob quickly made a sensible interpretation. He recognized the symbols and he then understood that they were actual people and actual events in symbols. Joseph's mother had died, and Jacob didn't understand the bowing part. He seemed nonsense that all of them, including Joseph's mother already dead, would bow.

What did Jacob do? He "kept the matter in mind". And that's what we should do sometimes. If we don't understand a prophecy, instead of speculating, simply keep it in our heart (memorize it), so when it happens, we can recognize the time and glorify God. Isn't that what Revelation says?
[Rev 1:3 NKJV] 3 Blessed [is] he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time [is] near.
[Rev 22:9 NKJV] 9 Then he said to me, "See [that you do] not [do that]. For I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God."

When the prophecy came to pass, what did we see? The bowing was also a symbol. Joseph would historically achieve higher authority than the entire family, including the mother that already passed away.

Regarding "Dispensationalism", the Bible does use a covenant language. Dispensationalism is just a conceptualization of it in a timeline.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by coksiw

Regarding "Dispensationalism", the Bible does use a covenant language. Dispensationalism is just a conceptualization of it in a timeline.

That's kind of like saying "preterism is true because the Bible uses the term 'past', and preterism is a conceptualisation of that concept.".

Dispensationalism is not about covenantalism, it is about eras or "dispensations" during which God relates to man under certain distinct era-specific terms. Dispensationalism posits 7 Dispensations. These do not correspond with seven "covenants, conceptualised ... in a timeline."

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Esaias

That's kind of like saying "preterism is true because the Bible uses the term 'past', and preterism is a conceptualisation of that concept.".

Dispensationalism is not about covenantalism, it is about eras or "dispensations" during which God relates to man under certain distinct era-specific terms. Dispensationalism posits 7 Dispensations. These do not correspond with seven "covenants, conceptualised ... in a timeline."

You are right. I do not have a strong stand on Dispensations anyways, as it is an extrabiblical tool to make sense of things. Those conceptualizations have usually weaknesses and can bring more problems than solutions in the long term if you stretch it too much.
Dispensationalism tries to answer the question “how were people saved during that time” and looks at the main covenants to answer the question.
Hmmm, now that I think about it, people were always saved by biblical faith. All that people in the Bible that pleased God worshiped Him, had faith in Him, and walked in righteousness.

[Michael The Disciple]

And the sword coming from his mouth is the word of God being preached and conquests are taking place because the all-important factor is that the kingdom is HERE NOW, and we are going forth with Jesus and seeing the kingdom fill the earth. It's not a coming kingdom, His Kingdom came!

Prets usually take half the truth. We have an "earnest" or "down payment" of the Kingdom NOW.

The greater part of the Kingdom is FUTURE.

2 Peter 1:10-11

10Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: 11For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

So Peter thought the Kingdom was YET TO COME.

I say that not one Pret has ever entered the Kingdom of God EXCEPT in an "earnest" situation.

1 Cor. 15: 50

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

I think they all have flesh and blood so no the Kingdom has NOT YET COME for them.

When will it?

When Jesus comes! In the future!

1 Cor 15:

51Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

At the resurrection of the dead, at the last trumpet THEN we will in ACTUALITY enter into the Kingdom.

Paul was certain that the Kingdom was YET TO COME.

2 Tim. 4:1


1I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

4:18

18And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom: to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

So excitement and zeal for something to be true does not make it true.

The Prets teach HALF TRUTH on the issue.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Prets usually take half the truth. We have an "earnest" or "down payment" of the Kingdom NOW.

The greater part of the Kingdom is FUTURE.

Of all the prophecies of the Old Testament that were referenced in the New, and you've heard me say this before, Psalm 110:1 is the most oft-quoted and referred to prophecy by both Jesus, the apostles, and the writers of the New Testament.

It's the keynote in the sermon of Peter on the day of Pentecost. And the early church was known for preaching another king, Jesus. ANd we hardly hear anyone in your camp ever talk about the current kingdom. It's always what is to come. We only hear you acknowledge the current kingdom when discussions like this raise the issue of your silence about it. Then you say, well, it is here, but greater.

I never said it woulD not becomE greater in the future, sow what's with the accusation that we only tell half the truth. I focus on NOW because it is here now, and we are here now.

The Lord and apostles DID NOT put MORE attention on the greater aspect to come, but on the prophecy where Jesus sat at the right hand, which happened 2000 years ago and kicked into motion this current kingdom that shall become greater.

I try to match the focus of my own ministry with the focus the bible puts on things. Since the apostles and Jesus put more focus on the seating at the throne than how greater it will become I likewise do the same. But you have it opposite. You hardly mention the seating at the throne. In all my years around many churches, hardly anyone stressed that, and then I saw where Jesus and the apostles stressed it more than any prophecy!

2 Peter 1:10-11

10Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: 11For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

So Peter thought the Kingdom was YET TO COME.

Peter:


Acts 2:30-36.. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; ..(31).. He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. ..(32).. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. ..(33).. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. ..(34).. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, ..(35).. Until I make thy foes thy footstool. ..(36).. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

HIS FIRST SERMON on the day of Pentecost!

Just do a simple search of how many times Psalm 110:1 was alluded to or actually quoted.

I say that not one Pret has ever entered the Kingdom of God EXCEPT in an "earnest" situation.

Oh?

John 3:3.. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.


We're not in the kingdom BY EARNEST. We have the EARNEST of hte SPirit, not of the kingdom!

2 Corinthians 1:22.. Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.

We're as born again into the kingdom as anyone could be in the kingdom. The only part that's not is our bodies...which shall be taken care on the resurrection.

Where is there any note of the earnest of the kingdom? Jesus said the Kingdom was at hand 2000 years ago, not in earnest 2000 hears ago.

1 Cor. 15: 50

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

I think they all have flesh and blood so no the Kingdom has NOT YET COME for them.

Wow. what a distortion of what that verse means. FLESH AND BLOOD is speaking about ONE aspect of our beings that are not adapted to the kingdom yet, our bodies. It's a "periphrasis" of a simple reference to fallen bumanity, and the bodies are the parts of us that are still fallen. It's not talking about skin and hemoglobin, How do we not fight against flesh and blood but principalities when no one would ever think we were fighting hemoglobin and skin? It's a term referring to the fallen aspect of us, with our spirits and souls well in the KINGDOM that CAME!

We would not have the Holy Ghost if Jesus did not begin His kingdom, for Peter said that the Spirit was poured out BECAUSE Jesus sat down to rule. And HE RULES UNTIL all enemies are under his feet, NOT "AFTER".

The same chapter says this:

1 Corinthians 15:25.. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

HE RULES NOW. And we are in taht kingdom. IT CAME AT PENTECOST!

He sat on the right hand throne, which is an idiom for POWER throne, and we therefore have POWER.

Acts 1:8.. But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

They preached and preached and preached about his enthronement! And we're seated on THAT THRONE WITH HIM!

When will it?

When Jesus comes! In the future!

1 Cor 15:

51Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

Where does that say HIS KINGDOM COMES then? I read in the same chapter that his kingdom has started ever since he sat at the right hand and continues until all enemies are under his feet, not begins then. The Resurrection that you referred to is actually the point when his enemies are made his footstool. So, when we read he rules until the last enemy death is under his feet, and death is put under his feet and defeated when this mortal puts on immortality. You claim the kingdom STARTS then, but Paul in the same chapter says Jesus has been ruling that kingdom that came at Pentecost ever since his seating. THIS is a prime example of the error of Dispensationalism. Jews missed his Kingly entrance into the world by birth, and disps missed his kingdom that came at Pentecost.

At the resurrection of the dead, at the last trumpet THEN we will in ACTUALITY enter into the Kingdom.

Paul was certain that the Kingdom was YET TO COME.

2 Tim. 4:1


1I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

THAT is at the end when he judges at the white throne after all enemies have been put under his feet. He did not say the KINGDOM COMES at that point HE JUDGES in HIS KINGDOM When death goes into the lake, all enemies are under his feet. You have it perfectly backwards. He RULES UNTIL death is under his feet.

4:18

18And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom: to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

So excitement and zeal for something to be true does not make it true.

The Prets teach HALF TRUTH on the issue.

No, you teach it backwards and we never said the kingdom does not increase. Your disp thought of the kingdom is upsidedown.

[Michael The Disciple]

It's the keynote in the sermon of Peter on the day of Pentecost. And the early church was known for preaching another king, Jesus. ANd we hardly hear anyone in your camp ever talk about the current kingdom. It's always what is to come. We only hear you acknowledge the current kingdom when discussions like this raise the issue of your silence about it. Then you say, well, it is here, but greater.

I never said it woulD not becomE greater in the future, sow what's with the accusation that we only tell half the truth. I focus on NOW because it is here now, and we are here now.

You say it will get greater yes but you deny it is yet to come.

I do teach we are at the throne SPIRITUALLY SPEAKING. We are not there LITERALLY. If we were there literally there would be no need for Jesus to come again and receive us to himself.

But oh yea you believe thats already past.

Wow. what a distortion of what that verse means. FLESH AND BLOOD is speaking about ONE aspect of our beings that are not adapted to the kingdom yet, our bodies. It's a "periphrasis" of a simple reference to fallen bumanity, and the bodies are the parts of us that are still fallen. It's not talking about skin and hemoglobin, How do we not fight against flesh and blood but principalities when no one would ever think we were fighting hemoglobin and skin? It's a term referring to the fallen aspect of us, with our spirits and souls well in the KINGDOM that CAME!

In "preterism" words can never mean what they say. Paul clearly teaches that humans are not in the Kingdom of God in the verses. You teach the Kingdom of God is already come.

You deny the difference between entering "spiritually" and literally. You are the one distorting the truth. You do it by making the spiritual to be literal.

You claim the kingdom STARTS then, but Paul in the same chapter says Jesus has been ruling that kingdom that came at Pentecost ever since his seating.

Yes he has been ruling since Pentecost. "Spiritually" speaking. He will at HIS COMING defeat all the kingdoms of this world and reign over everything along with his newly immortal saints.

The Seventh Trumpet Rev. 11:15-18

15And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. 16And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God, 17Saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned. 18And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

The Church IS an aspect of the Kingdom. We will become children of God LITERALLY and not just by faith at his appearing and Kingdom. At the resurrection of the dead.

Note the difference in the two truths.

Galatians 3:26

For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

Luke 20

35But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: 36Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

See? Right now we are the children of God by faith.

But AT THE RESURRECTION we shall be children of God LITERALLY!

When the last trumpet blows we will be made immortal and become rulers with Christ in his LITERAL REIGN over all of the world. We will LITERALLY be kings and priests as he begins his glorious work of the restoration of all things!

[Michael The Disciple]

You claim the kingdom STARTS then, but Paul in the same chapter says Jesus has been ruling that kingdom that came at Pentecost ever since his seating. THIS is a prime example of the error of Dispensationalism. Jews missed his Kingly entrance into the world by birth, and disps missed his kingdom that came at Pentecost.

I agree his kingdom started at Pentecost "spiritually" speaking. You act like thats the same as when we as flesh and blood persons are CHANGED from mortal to immortal. From natural to spiritual. From terrestial to celestial. From earthly to heavenly.

In contrast to the Apostle Paul who said it happens LITERALLY at the last trump!

BTW I cant think of ANY Christian type group who does NOT teach we are seated in heavenly places NOW........spiritually speaking.