Larry, Nothing Heretical Here!
Filed Under (Paul's posts) by Paul on 19-12-2009
Tagged Under : Larry Siegle, Paul's Post
Wow, Larry, great point!
As heretical as this may sound, and I do not care to explain this at the present time, but we are intended to be a kind of ’second incarnation’ of Jesus Christ in the world today. What do I mean by this? We are to walk and to demonstrate the character and qualities of the Lord Jesus, and to be a manifestation of the living reality of what it means to be in the Presence of God. We need to walk in the power of what it means to be called “children of God.” Everything about who we are “in Christ” needs to be manifested in our thoughts, words and deeds. There is an “abundant life” (John 10:10) that does not preclude God’s blessing on every area of our lives, physical and spiritual.http://preterismdebate.ning.com/profiles/blogs/eclectic-preterism
Larry, that is the whole point of the Apostle Paul’s argument in the later half of 2 Corinthians 5, the new age has broken into the old.
17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. 18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. 20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. 2 Corinthians 5:16-21
Although I wouldn’t agree with your terminology, “2nd Incarnation”, the point is that Christians are, a new creation although we still have the ethical issue of, for want of a better term the “sin nature”, what the Apostle Paul terms in several passages as the “flesh”, with which to contend. The putting off of that sin nature, “flesh” won’t be fully manifested until the body is raised from the dead leaving the old nature behind.
42 So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. 43 It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 1 Corinthians 15:42-44, ESV
However, this is what is yet future, the resurrection of the dead. It is my contention that hyperpreteism’s “hope” ends at the grave. This is best illustrated in the question asked earlier in the very same thread your brilliant observation was posted. The hyperpreterist asks’
What final event would need to come in order for your understanding to be true? Is not what is left only that it is appointed unto man to die once and then the judgment?
What a depressing viewpoint if you think about it, because the hyperpreterist believes everything has been fulfilled the only thing left is death. The view of the hyperpreterist was shared by the Pagan Greeks which is exactly why the Apostle Paul wrote, “If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.”, but the Christian doesn’t have “hope” in just this life which ends in death, the Christian understands what the Apostle Paul goes on to explain.
20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. 24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. 28 When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all. 1 Corinthians 15:20-28, ESV
When this is accomplished, the culmination of God’s redemptive plan for his creation, then the answer to Sam’s point just above your comments,
Is full Preterism’s message: hey, listen, I know life sucks here and now, but you have fulfilled redemption in Christ, and Genesis 1 is not talking about a literal creation account! Be of good cheer! Is that our message? “Hey, I know you are sick. I know you need money, but, good news! Matthew 24 has been fulfilled!”
will be answered. That is the entire message of hope of Christianity. Christians will be restored to a full an abundant life in a restored creation. This is what differentiates the Christian message of hope from that of the Pagan Gnostic who like the hyperpreterist doesn’t believe in a new life after death. Sam correctly points out,
Gnosticism was not concerned with “this earth” or “this world”. Any view that cuts of the natural creation, the environment, the physically sick and poor, the poverty stricken and the physically afflicted is not a view that I care to endorse.
I would assume Larry that the reason you never got around to answering my question as to what differentiates the hyperpreterist view of the afterlife from that of the Pagan is that you couldn’t come up with an adequate answer. Well this is the answer. The Christian message isn’t about, “hey, life sucks now, but wait, when you die and leave this world behind it will get better”. No the Christian message of hope is the very real message contained in Romans 8,
18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience. Romans 8:18-25, ESV
The Christian “hope” is about redemption from all the effects of sin, death, sickness, disease, immorality that have been a part of history as we know it and being brought back to a fully abundant life in a restored creation. Truly a creation is which heaven and earth a fully reunited, where God is “all in all”, which includes the “redemption of our bodies”.
Indeed, the hyperpreterist message as pointed out by Sam’s quote above, isn’t a message of hope at all but is exactly why I contend hyperpreterism in the final analysis is an ally of the enemy. After all, don’t you guy’s claim the afterlife is all that is left, which would seem to be confirmed by the hyperpreterist’s rhetorical question.
BTW, just to clarify. By a ’second incarnation’ I was not implying any ‘God complex’ theology for believers. I simply meant that Christians ought to represent Christ to the world in a worthy manner by their words, thoughts and deeds. We are His hands and feet as we reach out to a lost and dying world where billions need to hear the message of His love and grace.
The church “militant”.
It should be noted, as well, that most full preterists would probably disclaim the notion that “the judgment” comes after death, as represented in Hebrews 9:27.
First of all, verse 28 is a key AD70 second coming passage and cannot be lost to any type of future coming — even if it is at that appointed time of death.
The first reflex seems to be to point out that Hebrews 9:27 “was written prior to AD70″ and as a result of that, according to the Historic/Grammatic Hermeneutic, it must be understood as applying to the transition period only.
This is but one example of the “AD70 Dispensationalism” that will continue to keep full preterism outside of the range of acceptable christian theology.
blessings to all.
TD
” . . . most full preterists would probably disclaim the notion that ‘the judgment’ comes after death, as represented in Hebrews 9:27. First of all, verse 28 is a key AD70 second coming passage and cannot be lost to any type of future coming — even if it is at that appointed time of death. The first reflex seems to be to point out that Hebrews 9:27 “was written prior to AD70″ and as a result of that, according to the Historic/Grammatic Hermeneutic, it must be understood as applying to the transition period only. This is but one example of the ‘AD70 Dispensationalism’ that will continue to keep full preterism outside of the range of acceptable christian theology.”
Regardless of how a “hyper-preterist” interprets Hebrews 9:27-28, the “hyper-preterist” framework requires, according to Revelation 14:13, that believers today are judged after they die:
“And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.”
As this verse indicates, after the fall of Babylon (Rev. 14:8), when the earth is harvested (Rev. 14:15), then generations of believers not only continue to die (”henceforth“), but they are judged (granted blessedness and rest) after their deaths.
In the “hyper-preterist” framework, this state of things described in Revelation 14:13 refers to the present day. Therefore, according to “hyper-preterism”:
Blessed are those who die in the Lord TODAY, because God immediately gives them rest from their labors and rewards them according to their works. God grants to them His favorable judgment in the Lord Jesus.
Amen.
God’s throne is eternal, and it is a Judgment-Throne (Ps. 97:2). It is established with judgment and justice forever (Isa. 9:7). Therefore it is impossible that God’s “judgment” ended in AD 70. It will never end. Part of the unending, ongoing judgment of the eternal Judge is the preservation of the souls of the saints (Ps. 97:10) and His righteous granting to them of blessedness and rest whenever they die in the Lord.
“Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints” (Ps. 116:15).
Dave
Dave,
Larry never got around to it, perhaps you could help,
How is the hyperpreterist “framework” any different than the “framework” of the Pagan in the 1st Century? The Pagan’s believed that after this life there was the afterlife the demarcation point being death. The afterlife consisted of leaving the body behind to forever rot in the tomb and escaping to Elysium. N.T. Wright reports that Plato wrote in Timaeues,
According to N. T. Wright, “even here, we note, Plato does not say that the virtuous souls become stars, merely that the individual stars are their homes, to which they will return.” (The Resurrection of the Son of God, N.T. Wright, Fortress Press, pg 58). Realizing the Greek Pagans held a view similar to what you think the ultimate destiny is according to the Biblical view, why would the Apostle Paul claim, those Pagans had no “hope”, “But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.” 1 Thessalonians 4:13. Save for the names, it seems, at least according to the hyperpreterist “framework” the “Christian” destiny and that of the Pagan are essentially the same. The question I have for you is what according to you differentiates the hyperpreterist “framework” from that of the Pagan Greek?
Hi Paul,
You said of the Pagans: “The afterlife consisted of leaving the body behind to forever rot in the tomb. . . . ”
Yes, the Pagan’s did believe some things that were in agreement with Scripture:
“For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease. Though the root thereof wax old in the earth, and the stock thereof die in the ground; yet through the scent of water it will bud, and bring forth boughs like a plant. But man dieth, and wasteth away: yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he? As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up: So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep” (Job 14:7-12).
You asked: “Realizing the Greek Pagans held a view similar to what you think the ultimate destiny is according to the Biblical view, why would the Apostle Paul claim, those Pagans had no ‘hope’”
I don’t understand the premise of the question. How is dwelling with Christ forever in a non-material form (as per “hyper-preterism”) less “hopeful” than dwelling with Christ forever in a material form?
You said: “Save for the names, it seems, at least according to the hyperpreterist ‘framework’ the ‘Christian’ destiny and that of the Pagan are essentially the same.”
Many Pagans, such as the Epicureans, believed that there was no afterlife at all. Many other Pagans, such as the Stoics, believed that there was an afterlife but that it was an impersonal existence. And many Pagans, including many of the Stoics, believed in a futurist eschatology –a cosmic conflagration a la the futurist interpretation of 2 Peter 3:7-12 (Oops!)
And the Pagans who believed in soul-immortality did not believe that they went immediately to Elysium upon death. It is wrong to portray the Pagan world as believing that men went to their blessed destiny when they died.
Dave
Hi David,
Thank you for following up, but I must ask, do you find the fact the Pagans got the concept of death correct puzzling? However that wasn’t my question. My question had to do with what differentiated the “hope” of the Pagan with that of the Hyperpreterist framework.
David goes on,
David, perhaps you should ask the Apostle Paul because he clearly states guy’s who had a similar “framework” as yours had no hope. However, why do you follow-up with a question rather than providing an answer? The question is, what is different about your claim of the “afterlife” with that of the Pagan whom the Apostle Paul claimed had no hope.
David goes on,
You can take your complaint up with N. T. Wright and I guess Plato, however, I still don’t see the answer to my question. Save for the names employed what differineates your “framework” from that of the Pagan Greeks?
Dave, “impersonal” doesn’t get you much, the Greeks had a habit of leaving the warrior his armament in the grave so that he could continue to battle his foes in the afterlife.
Hi Paul,
” . . . do you find the fact the Pagans got the concept of death correct puzzling?”
By “the concept of death” I assume you mean the non-material nature of the afterlife. No, it’s not puzzling that some of the Pagans’ beliefs agreed with Scripture. We call this “common grace.” Plato comes to mind.
“My question had to do with what differentiated the ‘hope’ of the Pagan with that of the Hyperpreterist framework.”
The hope of the Pagan was based on myths and fairy tales. The Hope of the “hyper-preterist” is Christ.
“The question is, what is different about your claim of the ‘afterlife’ with that of the Pagan whom the Apostle Paul claimed had no hope. . . . Save for the names employed what differineates your “framework” from that of the Pagan Greeks?”
I don’t believe in a non-personal afterlife (as per some forms of Paganism).
I don’t believe in annihilation (as per some forms of Paganism).
I don’t believe the dead go on a journey to Elysium (as per some forms of Paganism).
I don’t believe the dead have to wait for a futurist eschatology (as per some forms of Paganism, and you).
Unlike all those Pagans (and you), I believe that when I die, I will be judged by my Redeemer, and I will immediately enter into eternal, heavenly blessedness in Him and rest from my labors (Heb. 9:27; Rev. 14:13).
Dave
“Dave, ‘impersonal’ doesn’t get you much, the Greeks had a habit of leaving the warrior his armament in the grave so that he could continue to battle his foes in the afterlife.”
I was talking about the Stoics. The particular Greeks you mention here were obviously not of the Stoic persuasion.
Dave
Green “Blessed are those who die in the Lord TODAY, because God immediately gives them rest from their labors and rewards them according to their works. God grants to them His favorable judgment in the Lord Jesus.”
..DG’s stated theology on Heb. 9:27 — where the “telos and eschatos” of the rest promises, the covenant rewards, as well as the judgment of God remain unfulfilled until completed by the Lord at our “appointed time” — is something to which I can say amen.
Eph. 1:13.14 shows how the Holy Spirit in this life is the downpayment until we receive the fullness of our inheritance in the world to come. This two step process is as DG taught:
Ephesians 1:13b “ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, 14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.”
blessings!
“BTW, just to clarify. By a ’second incarnation’ I was not implying any ‘God complex’ theology for believers. I simply meant that Christians ought to represent Christ to the world in a worthy manner by their words, thoughts and deeds. We are His hands and feet as we reach out to a lost and dying world where billions need to hear the message of His love and grace.”
Good stuff, Larry. I’d even go further than that:
http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/23/under-your-feet/
Hi Dave,
Thanks for responding,
No, I mean the ideas supported by the verses from Job you quoted. You know what happens to the body at death. I wasn’t talking about life after death, the Pagans just believed in the afterlife.
Dave continues,
I’m not sure how that would differentiate the “hope”. My question wasn’t your “basis” for hope, but what is the difference between your hope in the afterlife and that held by the Pagan Greeks.
Dave continues,
Your “hope” sounds very much like what Cicero wrote of in his work De Repulica as reported by N.T. Wright.
Dave continues,
Dave, perhaps you don’t understand the Christian view of life after death, as opposed to the afterlife, but I believe that as the Apostle Paul wrote and told the Corinthians prior to AD70, when the body ceases to operate the believer is immediately in the presence of Jesus Christ, (2 Cor 5:8) however I like the Apostle Paul hope to “attain the resurrection of the dead” (Phil 3:11) even knowing that during the afterlife I will enjoy the presence of Jesus Christ. Odd your view is very much like what Cicero outlined a “hope” that the Apostle Paul claims is no “hope” at all.
Dave adds,
I wasn’t talking about any specific Greeks.
BTW Dave, have you ever contemplated why it is God became man and according to the Apostle Paul remains a man, only to redeem ’spirits’?
Todd: “..DG’s stated theology on Heb. 9:27 — where the “telos and eschatos” of the rest promises, the covenant rewards, as well as the judgment of God remain unfulfilled until completed by the Lord at our “appointed time” — is something to which I can say amen.”
According to Hebrews 9:27-28:
Even as men die once and are afterwards judged once, so also Christ died once and will return once.
The writer of Hebrews tells us that the one-time Return of Christ was “about to” happen (Heb. 1:14; 2:5; 6:5; 9:11; 10:1; 13:14) “in a very little while,” without “delay” (Heb. 10:37).
The people to whom he wrote were living “in the consummation of the ages” (Heb. 9:26), in the last of the days of the prophets who predicted the Second Coming of Christ (Heb. 1:1-2).
The writer of Hebrews also said that three things were “near” (engus/engizo):
1.) The fiery wrath that would be poured out on the wicked in the Second Coming (Heb. 6:7-8; cf. Heb. 10:27: “fire about to consume the enemies“), and
2.) The vanishing of the waxing old covenant (Heb. 8:13), and
3.) The Day of the Christ (i.e., the Second Coming) (Heb. 10:25).
The writer of Hebrews went on to confirm that when the old covenant would disappear (i.e., when it would be loosed / thrown down in the future), then the Way of the Heavenly Holy Places would be manifest (i.e., the New Jerusalem would come) and the Time of Reformation (the New Covenant World) would arrive.
These were not events that were to be scattered throughout history. They are not existential experiences to be realized by each believer personally throughout history. According to the writer of Hebrews, the eschatological “rest promises,” “covenant rewards,” and “judgment of God” were fulfilled at one historic time: When the old covenant vanished, when “the first tabernacle” no longer had a standing, in AD 70.
We can’t confuse the “rest” we will receive from our labors in Christ when we die with “the rest” from Adamic Sin and Death we already consummately enjoy because the old-covenant world (the Ministration and Body of Death) was destroyed by the power of the Cross in AD 70.
Todd: “Eph. 1:13.14 shows how the Holy Spirit in this life is the downpayment until we receive the fullness of our inheritance in the world to come.”
Ephesians 1:21 shows that “the world to come” was actually “the age . . . about to come” –the new covenant age that would come at the Second Coming, when the old covenant disappeared.
Additionally, the Holy Spirit was not a down payment for biological metamorphosis. The Holy Spirit (emphasis on “Spirit”) was a down payment (i.e., first payment, first installment, first fruits [Rom. 8:23]) for a spiritual metamorphosis.
Dave
Hi Paul,
“ . . . what is the difference between your hope in the afterlife and that held by the Pagan Greeks.”
I’ve tried to answer the question but I guess I don’t understand what you’re really asking. Why don’t you answer the question for me so I can understand what you’re getting at. I’ll put it this way: What is the difference (aside from “the names”) between these two things:
1. Your belief in a futurist eschatology with a cosmic conflagration
and
2. The Pagan belief in a futurist eschatology with a cosmic conflagration?
“Odd your view is very much like what Cicero outlined a ‘hope’ that the Apostle Paul claims is no ‘hope’ at all.”
Odd you think that Paul taught that non-physical resurrection-life is “no hope at all.” Where did he teach that?
“BTW Dave, have you ever contemplated why it is God became man and according to the Apostle Paul remains a man, only to redeem ’spirits’?”
Have you ever contemplated why it is that you assume that the spirit of a man is not a man? Jesus spoke of the rich “man” in hades (Lk. 16:22-23). Paul spoke of the possibility that a “man” was caught up out of his physicality (2 Cor. 12:2).
Dave
Hi Dave,
I think you did in your last post, the point was though that there is nothing different between what you are advocating and what Cicero wrote about. BTW, where have I ever suggested there will be some, “cosmic conflagartion”?
Dave continues,
I’m not sure why you would think that odd, the view of a non-phyical, non-material “resurrection” is what the Pagan Greeks held. The Apostle explicitly states that is no “hope”, in 1 Thessalonians 4, “But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.”
Dave continues,
I’m not “assuming” anything, the Son of God became a man, didn’t he? “14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” Why if the only aspect of man to be redeemed was the spirit did the Word become flesh? Surely you’re not basing your anthropological claims on a parable and a “tongue-n-cheek” answer to a group of doubters both of which were not dealing with anthropological concepts or issues?
PaulT
Hi Paul,
Again, what is the difference (aside from “the names”) between these two things:
1. Your belief in a futurist eschatology with a cosmic conflagration
and
2. The Pagan belief in a futurist eschatology with a cosmic conflagration?
There is essentially nothing different between what you are advocating and what the Pagans advocated. So . . . if I’m wrong because the Pagans believed in a non-material afterlife, then you’re wrong because the Pagans believed in a futurist eschatology with a cosmic conflagration.
But of course, similarity to a Pagan belief proves nothing. Our similarities to Pagan beliefs don’t prove that either one of us is wrong. If you want to disprove “hyper-preterism,” you have to use Scripture instead. Using “guilt by association” with Pagans has no more substance than Roderick’s “2,000 years of Church history” argument. It makes for good rhetoric but it prove nothing.
“the view of a non-phyical, non-material “resurrection” is what the Pagan Greeks held. The Apostle explicitly states that is no “hope”, in 1 Thessalonians 4”
Paul did not say that non-physical, non-material resurrection is no hope. He said that those who are outside of Christ (unbelievers) have no hope. That statement has nothing to do with physicality or non-physicality in the afterlife. Even if the Pagans had believed in a physical afterlife they would have still had no hope.
“the Son of God became a man, didn’t he?”
Yes. But you assume that He would cease to be a man if he was no longer in His flesh. Do you actually think that when Jesus was dead for three days He became “Un-Man”? Surely you’re not going there.
“Why if the only aspect of man to be redeemed was the spirit did the Word become flesh?
Redemption is from sin (condemnation and alienation from God), not from our current physical bodies. The traditional futurist framework, which says that our current physical bodies are sin-cursed and in need of endowment with a new material makeup, is in principle no different than the old Gnostic concept of the body. It’s “carnalized Gnosticism.” Instead of our current, sinful bodies being replaced with superior “spirit” (Gnosticism), they’re replaced with superior “new material” (futurism). These are just two variations on the same theme.
One reason Jesus became “flesh” was so that we can be free from Sin and resurrected to eternal life in Him while in our current physical bodies, making our temporary bodies instruments of eternal works (Rev. 14:13).
“Surely you’re not basing your anthropological claims on a parable and a “tongue-n-cheek” answer to a group of doubters both of which were not dealing with anthropological concepts or issues?”
Please post the chapter and verse that teaches that the spirit of a man in the afterlife is not a man. Surely you’re not basing your anthropological claims on scripture-less assumption. I look forward to seeing those scriptures, Paul.
I might add that the writer of Hebrews spoke of “the days of [Christ's] flesh” as being past (Heb. 5:7), which implied that Christ was no longer in His flesh (in His physical form) when Hebrews was written. Yet He was and is still a Man (1 Tim. 2:5).
Dave
Hi Dave,
I don’t know Dave, as indicated I don’t advocate a “cosmic conflagration”, nor does the Bible. The “analogy” of faith, the meta narrative of the Bible is the restoration of that which was lost. This is the position I advocate.
Dave continues,
Actually what it prove is that you are advocating a view that the Apostle Paul defined as “no hope”.
Dave continues,
Sure it does because he contrasts those who have “no hope” with Christians position of the bodily resurrection of the dead.
Dave continues,
You are kidding right, Dave, he was a “dead” man.
Dave continues,
You are kidding right? The Gnostics believed the body would never be redeemed, the material was by nature “evil”.
Dave continues,
Enjoy
8 So Saul disguised himself and put on other garments and went, he and two men with him. And they came to the woman by night. And he said, “Divine for me by a spirit and bring up for me whomever I shall name to you.” 9 The woman said to him, “Surely you know what Saul has done, how he has cut off the mediums and the necromancers from the land. Why then are you laying a trap for my life to bring about my death?” 10 But Saul swore to her by the LORD, “As the LORD lives, no punishment shall come upon you for this thing.” 11 Then the woman said, “Whom shall I bring up for you?” He said, “Bring up Samuel for me.” 12 When the woman saw Samuel, she cried out with a loud voice. And the woman said to Saul, “Why have you deceived me? You are Saul.” 13 The king said to her, “Do not be afraid. What do you see?” And the woman said to Saul, “I see a god coming up out of the earth.” 14 He said to her, “What is his appearance?” And she said, “An old man is coming up, and he is wrapped in a robe.” And Saul knew that it was Samuel, and he bowed with his face to the ground and paid homage. 1 Samuel 28:8-14,
While dead what is Samuel described as? Here is another one,
And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39 See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” Luke 24:38
What does Jesus Christ claim distinguishes a man from a spirit?
Dave continues,
Do you have any arguments that aren’t built on an implied meaning? The author of 1 John specifically writes He is still in the “flesh”, (1 John 4:2) and the Apostle explicitly states the man Christ Jesus has a body. So clearly the author of Hebrews is conveying something other than your strained “implication”, else we have a contradiction.
PaulT
“I don’t advocate a “cosmic conflagration”, nor does the Bible.”
You disagree with 2,000 years of historic Christianity, Heretic!
Dave
I John 4:2 is a confession that Jesus had come “in the flesh” a phrase which is used by inspired writers to affirm more than simply His entering into the physical realm. “in the Spirit” and “in the flesh” are also used to convey the meaning of having entered into the covenant “world” in order to accomplish the work of redemption. Yes, the Word “became flesh and tabernacled among us”–everyone understands this as a reference to His physical appearance as a human being (John 1:14; Gal. 4:4).
With reference to the “pagan” understanding of the afterlife, it is not important, right or wrong. The question is always, “What does the Bible teach?” Any element of truth that may have been part of Greek “pagan” philosophy is certainly interesting, but not actually relevant to the discussion itself.
It may be the case that your view appears consistent because you begin with an incorrect presupposition about the very purpose and scope of redemption. Preterists are often accused (wrongly) of being Gnostic because of deeming the resurrection of the physical “body” as unnecessary. However, it seems to me that futurists are guilty of believing the “flesh” is evil and in need of redemption. Preterists have never said the “body” of a person is corrupt and evil and therefore something to be hated and despised and therefore discarded eternally. We have simply said that within the Biblical framework, the physical body is not the issue. Adam was not sinful because he had a physical body, he was sinful because of his actions and the separation that occurred in the Garden was spiritual and had nothing to do with his physical bodily existance.
Is a person separated from God simply because they live in a physical body? Or, is it the case that a person is separated from God because of their sin and disobedience? If the “flesh” was inherently evil, Jesus would have been pronounced evil simply by virtue of the fact that He had been “born of a woman”
Redemption is about the restoration of relationship, not about the mode of existance where one dwells. Angels are “spirit” and yet they sinned apart from having any connection to the flesh? Therefore, it is possible for both physical and spirtual beings to sin against God. Resurrection is about being ushered into the presence of God with a relationship that has been fully and completely restored because of the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. People are transferred “out of the kingdom of darkness and into the Kingdom of God’s dear Son.
Dave,
LoL, didn’t know “cosmic conflagration” was in the ecumenical creeds.
Larry,
I may be wrong about this, but I think if you look up the “Greek” grammar on 1 John 4:2 you will find out the concept is that not only has he come but continues in the flesh.
Regarding the Pagan and Scripture, I agree Scripture is key, although I would tend to wonder how the Pagan got it correct without God’s revealed truth. Nevertheless, the point is what the Apostle Paul specifically states is that the Pagan’s had no hope, so if the hyperpreterist’s view is in alignment with that of the Pagan as Dave certainly suggests then what Scripture has to say on the subject is the view of the hyperpreterist equates to no hope.
Clearly what separates men from God is sin, the point is sin permeates the whole man. The Son of God became a man to redeem man, so I’m not sure what angels have to do with the subject. What redemption is all about is life therefore by necessity the concept is dealing with existence.
“Yomi said: If Preterism maintains that Christ returned circa AD70, then the resurrection took place then, and preterism has removed my hope and the hopes of millions of believers since then till today; has it not?
MG’s Answer:
“Hope deferred makes the heart sick, but when the desire comes, it is a tree of life.” (Proverbs 13:12). “A desire accomplished is sweet to the soul.”(13:19)
Yomi you should not be disturbed that Christ returned in the first century because that means we have a realized hope. A delay or non-fulfillment of Christ would make the heart perpetually sick as a result of a defaulted promise.” (http://phillyflash.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/return-from-oz-by-dorothy-anderson/#comment-8100, #60)
A realized hope is a lost hope, is it not? What is sight is no longer hope. The full preterist message on this fulfillment sounds GREAT! But it is only a half truth.
The contention that our hope has fully been turned into sight, and that we need not stand in the same posture of those in the New Testament (because our adversary supposedly no longer walks about) is very bold.. and wrong.
The consequences upon the individual of losing this hope falsely is catastrophic. The erosion of soul in hyper preterism can be traced to the loss of faith, hope and expectation for a coming victory over this world as much as any factor I’ve seen. These are more consequences of “AD70 Dispensationalism”.
The adversary is still lurking about seeking whom he may devour, I assure you. Those who let down their guard are easy prey. Those who counsel others to let down their guard will have to give an account in that day.
blessings to all.
TD
“A realized hope is a lost hope, is it not?”
Your confusing the fulfilled-in-AD-70 hope of Israel’s union with God in Christ with the throughout-all-generations hope that all believers have of blessed rest from their labors in Christ after they die (1 Cor. 15:18-19; Rev. 14:13).
It is not true that if the Hope of Israel is fulfilled then there is no longer any hope after that point. Paul taught that even after all things are fulfilled and “that which is perfect” has come, three things remain: Faith, *Hope* and Love (1 Cor. 13:13).
This doctrine makes sense only if after the fulfillment of all things takes place there are still sinners who come to faith in Christ and place their “hope” in Him. Thus the Psalmist and the writer of Hebrews tell us many times that Jesus is “a Priest forever” (Heb. 7:21). A “priest forever” implies sinners forever (i.e., sinners before and after the Second Coming) who will put their faith and “hope” in Him:
“Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them” (Heb. 7:25).
In the futurist framework of course, in the year 3020 or whenever, there will be no more “hope,” and Christ will no longer be a Priest saving sinners and making intercession for them. As we can see, there’s only one problem with that scheme: The perspicuous decrees of Scripture.
Dave
Re “Sinners Forever”
ton aiwna doesn’t necessarily mean forever.
The doctrine still makes perfect sense even if the New Covenant has an end. Tell me, when did Christ hand the kingdom to the Father? Is God all in all now? That’s nuts. And that’s a hope reduced to pie-in-the-sky gnosticism.
Hell is forever.
Sinners are in Hell forever.
Therefore, Sinners are forever.
There is an “inside” and an “outside” pictured relative to the New Jerusalem in Rev.21. Believers are inside the City, Unbelievers are outside the City. The “gates” are open for those who repent and enter into the New Covenant and experience eternal life. The healing of the nations takes place in the “new heavens and a new earth” following the change of God’s administration from the Old to the New Covenants in A.D. 70.
Larry,
God is said to be all in all “after” the destruction of “every” rule, power and authority, all the enemies of God. This comes from 1 Cor 15 wherein Psalm 8 is the background as man fulfilling his original charge of taking “dominion” of the earth. The “sinners”, (as in those who oppose God) have been judged and removed in Revelation 20. Revelation 21 a continuation of that scene shows heaven coming to earth, sinners have been removed therefore they are “outside” the gates. The reason the gates of the city never close is because there are no more enemies around to enter the city. The gates of cities were closed at night to prohibt enemies from coming into the cities. Psalm 8 has been fully realized as the man from heaven takes dominion of the entire earth after having destroying all the enemies of God as Adam was originally charged to do.
Paul: “I don’t advocate a “cosmic conflagration”. . . . .”
Dave: “You disagree with 2,000 years of historic Christianity, Heretic!
Paul: “LoL, didn’t know “cosmic conflagration” was in the ecumenical creeds.
It’s not. The blood of Christ isn’t in the ecumenical creeds either. But the universal church has always and everywhere believed in the sin-atoning blood of Christ. Similarly, the universal church has always and everywhere (until relatively recently) believed in a “cosmic conflagration”. But you don’t. Therefore you disagree with 2,000 years of historic Christianity, Heretic.
Question: If you believe it is legitimate for you to disagree with the universal church in regard to the “cosmic conflagration,” is it not then potentially legitimate for “hyper-preterists” to disagree with the universal church in regard to other eschatological elements?
Dave
Dave: “It is not true that if the Hope of Israel is fulfilled then there is no longer any hope after that point. Paul taught that even after all things are fulfilled and “that which is perfect” has come, three things remain: Faith, *Hope* and Love (1 Cor. 13:13). This doctrine makes sense only if after the fulfillment of all things takes place there are still sinners who come to faith in Christ and place their “hope” in Him.”
Mike Bull: “Re “Sinners Forever” ton aiwna doesn’t necessarily mean forever. The doctrine still makes perfect sense even if the New Covenant has an end.”
The New Covenant has an end? And you say “hyper-preterists” are heretics?
Mike Bull: “Tell me, when did Christ hand the kingdom to the Father?”
In AD 70, when Christ completed the work the Father sent Him to do –when He regenerated all the Father’s chosen ones (living and dead, Old Testament and New Testament, the universal church) in the end of the old covenant age (Matt. 19:28).
Mike Bull: “Is God all in all now?”
Yes. When the hand-made house fell, the universal church (living and dead, Old Testament and New Testament, the universal church) became His eternal tabernacle –”the fulness of Him that filleth all in all” (Eph. 1:23). Thus since the vanishing of the Ministration of Death and Condemnation in AD 70, God is “All Things” in all His people, from Adam to you.
Mike Bull: “That’s nuts. And that’s a hope reduced to pie-in-the-sky gnosticism.”
That’s “Christ in you,” the “hope” to which the pre-70 church eagerly looked (Col. 1:27).
Dave
Dave
Every Covenant has an end, an “atonement” division of the redeemed and the condemned, followed by glory. See Ray Sutton “That You May Prosper” to understand this throughout the OT. Available free online. No Christian should be ignorant of this factor, and most are.
The firstfruits church was the foundation, not the whole building. If you deny this, are we not part of this building?
The AD70 hope, was, I believe, truly, a resurrection. And the second resurrection will be just like it. See: http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/12/17/the-end-is-not-yet/
There is an end. Jesus will reign until all His enemies are under His feet. That is not yet accomplished unless you deny reality. And quite obviously, at the end of Jesus’ reign, He will hand the kingdom to His Father. That is exactly how Covenants work.
Paul: “The reason the gates of the city never close is because there are no more enemies around to enter the city. The gates of cities were closed at night to prohibt enemies from coming into the cities.”
But the City still has “a great and high wall” (Rev. 21:12).
So, the city encompasses the world.
Additionally, “the nations of the saved” walk in its light (Rev. 21:24), which implies that there are nations of non-saved that still exist and who do not walk in the light of the City. The glory and the honor of the nations are brought into the City (Rev. 21:26), which implies that there is non-glory and non-honor of nations that still exist and are not brought into the City. As the next verse elaborates, those who are profane and abominable and the liars of the nations still exist and they are prohibited from entering into the City (Rev. 21:27). “Healing of the nations” continues after the City is established, which implies that all things are not perfect in the nations (Rev. 21:2). These imperfect nations, in fact, contain those who are “outside”: “Dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whoever loves and makes a lie” (Rev. 22:15).
The Bible elsewhere confirms that after the Parousia, after the fulfillment of all prophecy, in the new heavens and the new earth, there will be cursed nations that will, year by year, refuse to worship God (Zech. 14:16-19) and that will continue to attack God’s people, though ultimately to no avail (Isa. 54:15-17).
Dave
Once again, your view is derived by implication, how do you know the author isn’t reinforcing a concept spelled out earlier in the work comparing and contrasting what will be with what currently existed. The Bible elsewhere also explains God’s plan of redemption will encompass the entire world, all will bow to the King.
Hi Dave,
Merry Christmas,
You are comparing the underlying premise whereby men are saved with your “comic conflagration”? Do you have any evidence there was anything like the under lying premise behind the concept of salvation regarding eschatology. You 1st need to prove that the underlying premise of the universal church regarding eschatology contained a “comsic conflageration”.
Dave you are begging the question. You 1st need to prove that the underlying premise behind the 3 eschatological events spelled out in the creeds includes a “cosmic conflagration”. Good luck. Especially in light of Harol O.J. Browns assessment,
Regarding your question, what you advocate is a fundamental departure from the faith once and for all delivered to the saints regarding the nature of the resurrection of the dead and God’s redemptive purpose for his good creation, to name just a couple of the major implications of hyperpreterism. I’m not sure what you mean by “legitimate”, but the view you advocate certainly isn’t a “legitimate” orthodox reformed evangelical Christian perspective. Nor can your view be legitimately supported from Scripture if you consistently apply grammatico-historical hermetical rules for interpreting Scripture. Indeed as we’ve documented in many cases your view shares more in common with neo-orthodoxy, perhaps that is where your view can find some legitimacy, in the group of those who deny the Supernatural.
Hi Paul,
Regardless of what the ecumenical creeds say or imply, the belief in a “cosmic conflagration” has been universal in the church until relatively recently. Therefore you are in disagreement with 2,000 years of Christian history.
Dave
P.S. Heretic.
Dave,
Don’t assert your position, validate it. For example, I think in the Epistle of Barnabus he blends the 7th day into the 8th day which is eternity. No “cosmic” conflageration.
Hi Paul,
You want me to prove that the historic church has (until relatively recently) always taught a “cosmic conflagration”?
Dave
Yes, you asserted a position that I’m unaware of.
For example here is Augustine’s view of Rev 20,
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf102.iv.XX.12.html
Don’t see any “cosmic” conflageration in it. Perhaps Augustine wasn’t aware of what you seemingly know.
Hi Paul,
Augustine, The City of God, Book 20, Chapter 18:
“Some one will perhaps put the question, If after judgment is pronounced the world itself is to burn, where shall the saints be during the conflagration, and before it is replaced by a new heavens and a new earth, since somewhere they must be, because they have material bodies? We may reply that they shall be in the upper regions into which the flame of that conflagration shall not ascend, as neither did the water of the flood; for they shall have such bodies that they shall be wherever they wish. Moreover, when they have become immortal and incorruptible, they shall not greatly dread the blaze of that conflagration, as the corruptible and mortal bodies of the three men were able to live unhurt in the blazing furnace.”
Dave
Paul: “For example, I think in the Epistle of Barnabus he blends the 7th day into the 8th day which is eternity. No ‘cosmic’ conflageration.”
Barnabas 21:3: “The day is at hand, in which everything shall be destroyed together with the Evil One.”
Dave
Boys, get some Old Testament into ya.
2 Peter 3 is about AD70 (Leithart makes this inescapable in his The Promise of His Appearing), so the only future conflagration is the one is Revelation 20.
And in Revelation 20, it is only the enemies of God that get torched. The passage is full of Old Testament symbols, particularly Amalek/Agag and the Gog/Magog army. If Ezekiel 38-39 were a prophecy of the events of Esther (a war from India to Ethiopia), then it might be an event like that. It will be both a repeat of Mount Carmel (idolaters slain by God’s man) and the saints taking vengeance and plundering their enemies as in Esther.
See my book Totus Christus for the full picture. There’s a lot more background required to understand this fully.
Mike Bull wrote: “Boys, get some Old Testament into ya. 2 Peter 3 is about AD70. . . . ”
Hi Dad,
Neither Paul nor I believe that 2 Peter 3 is about a literal fire at the end of human history. (Get some debate context into ya.)
My point in posting those quotes of Augustine and the Epistle of Barnabas was to show that THEY (the church fathers) believed in a “cosmic conflagration.” And my point in demonstrating that was to show that Paul (who disagrees with the fathers’ belief in a cosmic conflagration) disagrees with “2,000 years of Christian history” –just like “hyper-preterists” disagree with “2,000 years of church history.”
Paul is “guilty” of much the same “error” that he is accusing “hyper-preterists” of committing: Going against the eschatological consensus of the Historic and Universal Mother Church.
Dave
Dave
I got the debate context, and your point. Don’t you think that it’s clear that a final “conflagration” was debatable but a final judgment was not? Paul’s claim does have merit.
My point was to distance AD70 from Revelation 20, and to show that the fire from heaven is not a total conflagration but a reference to atonement sacrifices. I mentioned my book because it shows how the literary structure of 1 Kings 18, Ezekiel 38-39, Esther, Rev. 13, and Rev. 20 bears this out. When do you ever see this factor on the table in a debate? Yet it is crucial. It is a major part of the way the authors communicated, and sometimes the only way a passage can be interpreted.
Better to get off the accusations of error, the fathers and the apocrypha and deal with the Bible. The church fathers were babies when it came to this stuff anyway:
http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/04/16/three-resurrections-2/
Hope that helps, son
(I actually meant “boys” in a sit around the pub table with beers kinda way)
Mike Bull: “Don’t you think that it’s clear that a final ‘conflagration’ was debatable. . . ?”
No. Show me where any of the church fathers denied or debated or questioned the eschatological doctrine of a cosmic conflagration.
Mike Bull: “Better to get off the accusations of error, the fathers and the apocrypha and deal with the Bible. The church fathers were babies when it came to this stuff anyway.”
I agree. Now tell that to those who condemn “hyper-preterists” on the basis that we disagree with 2,000 years of eschatological consensus.”
Dave
ROFL, you make a claim you can’t prove and then turn around and expect us to prove they denied something they never inserted in the creeds. Dave, your argument isn’t very effective. The onus is on you to prove your claim.
Dave
Is it always “cosmic”? Are we conflating it with the lake of fire?
The nature of the fire from heaven in a highly symbolic passage is certainly debatable. But the certainty of a final judgment and restoration of all things is not.
The fathers certainly had enough familiarity with the Scriptures to recognise that history will not go on forever. There is always a reckoning. I believe they began a process of understanding the Scriptures that continues today. We stand on their shoulders. But they weren’t fools. Their familiarity with the forms of the Old Testament dwarfs most of us moderns.
The 2000 years of eschatological consensus varies on the details, but a true end of all things flows out of the Covenant structures right from Genesis 1-3. The Lord sets things in motion, allows man to make of the commission what he will, then He turns up on Day 7 to assess. There are no exceptions to the rule. The Great Commission is just such a commission. It is what all previous Covenants foreshadowed. And the new Adam will not fail.
Cutting the end off the New Covenant sells the farm for gnosticism. It is no small detail. It is an idea so alien to the Bible, to the fully-loaded Old Covenant freight train behind the New, that it has been unthinkable for two millennia.
Hyperpreterists really must take stock of the Covenant structures of the Old Testament and how they are fulfilled in the New. They will find no support for their theory. My book hammers with home with a thousand nails.
Hi Mike Bull,
Changing the subject won’t help Paul’s case. The fact remains that in denying a future destruction of all things by literal fire, Paul disagrees with 2,000 years of united Christian history –just like “hyper-preterists” do.
Dave
Hi Dave,
How does he define “everything” and “destroyed”?
Barnabas 15:4
Give heed, children, what this meaneth; He ended in six days. He
meaneth this, that in six thousand years the Lord shall bring all
things to an end; for the day with Him signifyeth a thousand years;
and this He himself beareth me witness, saying; Behold, the day of
the Lord shall be as a thousand years. Therefore, children, in six
days, that is in six thousand years, everything shall come to an end.
Barnabas 15:5
And He rested on the seventh day. this He meaneth; when His Son
shall come, and shall abolish the time of the Lawless One, and shall
judge the ungodly, and shall change the sun and the moon and the
stars, then shall he truly rest on the seventh day.
Barnabas 15:8
Finally He saith to them; Your new moons and your Sabbaths I cannot
away with. Ye see what is His meaning ; it is not your present
Sabbaths that are acceptable [unto Me], but the Sabbath which I have
made, in the which, when I have set all things at rest, I will make
the beginning of the eighth day which is the beginning of another
world.
Barnabas 15:9
Wherefore also we keep the eighth day for rejoicing, in the which
also Jesus rose from the dead, and having been manifested ascended
into the heavens.
Dave, doesn’t sound like a “cosmic conflagration” to me. He blends the 7th day into the 8th day which wouldn’t make much sense if in his view the material created order is to be “destroyed”. Perhaps you are anachronistically reading a concept into the text the author never intended. We look forward to you providing some evidence to prove your claim that for 2000 years the churches united position was a view of cosmic “conflageration”.
PaulT
Dave,
Show us the “doctrine” of cosmic conflagration.
Hi Dave,
Dave,
Thank you for pointing this out, however, I think you need to keep reading, it appears Augustine also held there would be believers on earth alive at the time of Christ’s 2nd Advent.
What does Augustine maintain one must hold if they are to be a Christian?