The Preterist Blog ~ 100% Hyperpreterist Free|we can haz rezurekshun?

I am once again attempting to listen straight through Dr. Bahnsen’s audio series on Revelation. I tried this before but my life got very busy, and I didn’t get very far. So I am starting again, and will post the nuggets here.

Dr. Bahsen warned against “flattening” our theology when we compare Scripture to Scripture and to remember that it is not always true that similar phrases mean the same thing. They can…. but they always sometimes don’t. This is of course part of the interpretative error of the hyperpreterists who shoehorn everything into an AD70 mold, which error is sometimes ignorantly propogated by my orthodox preterist brethren.

Specifically Dr. Bahnsen pointed this out:

Romans 8:9 - But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit….

Revelation 1:10 - I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day….

“In the Spirit” in these two passages are not the same thing, but they are related.

In a related issue, J.A. Schep noted in his work The Nature of Resurrection Body:

As is the case with Paul’s usage of the word “sarx,” the term “body of Christ”? isused with different conclusions. It can denote Christ’s personal, literal body, in which he dies, rose from the dead, went to heaven, and will come again; the Church; and the bread in the Lord’s Supper. Though the three are related, they are not identical.

Gentry makes the same point:

Beyond the introduction of this matter relative to the philosophy of language, it is important to realize that A.D. 70 is not unrelated to the Second Advent. As the ending of the era of sacrificial rituals and Israel-exalting redemptive history, A.D. 70 is a pre-consummational type of the Second Advent’s history ending, consummational conclusion. Hence, the similarity of language and the mixing of ideas is justified on the basis of the relationship of type (A.D. 70) to antitype (Second Advent) [This phenomenon of type/anti-type is very common in Davidic/Messianic passages. In such references, what is said of the historical King David often applies to the Messianic King Jesus.]

Even so come Lord Jesus.

Originally posted March 26, 2005

Continuing with Bahsen:

To him who overcomes I will give some of the hidden manna to eat. Revelation 2:17

What is the hidden manna? What connections are we supposed to make? Pergamos was one of the first cities to institute enforced emporor worship, which of course the Christians would not do, and thus they were cut off from the marketplace, without money, without food. God promises that He will be their food: Jesus the bread of life, the manna that came down from Heaven.

Also, this manna is “hidden.” Where else was manna hidden? After God’s provision to Israel in the wilderness, He instructed them to hide manna in the Ark of the Covenant. Also there is possibly an allusion to an apocryphal story in which after the Temple was destroyed, the Prophet Jeremiah (or an angel in some versions) saved the Ark, and specifically the hidden manna within, to be saved for the messianic age. Was John alluding to this? Possibly.

Christ is comforting His Church that He is their provision.

Thus you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. Revelation 2:15

Oh boy, call the Political Correctness Police, Jesus hates certain doctrine from “professing” Christians. You mean sometimes it is right to cast out false doctrine? Even if the perpretators are allegedly “in” the Church? EGAD!!!! GASP! Was Jesus a….a…… a….. [choke] heresy hunter?????????

And I will give him a white stone, and on the stone a new name written which no one knows except him who receives it.�? Revelation 2:15

In that day, a white stone was one’s passport into pagan festivals and banquets. Jesus promises that He gives entrance to His banquet. And in the Semitic culture one’s name was more than just a word, it was a revelation of one’s character. Christ gives us a new nature, a new character…a new name. And only we really know the changes He has wrought.

Continuing with my Bahnsen Revelation study, he was discussing the Church at Pergamos. He noted that the book of Revelation is not apolitical nor are Christ’s words.

Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. Rev 1:5

Bahnsen noted that while kings may exercise rule and sovereignity - Jesus is the ruler of them all. All things are subject to Christ - claiming that laws and morality and yes politics have nothing to do with faith or the sphere of Christian belief is not the image presented of Christ. Also it was noted that John was exiled to Patmos… a place where political prisoners were sent. In John’s descriptions of Christ very real challenges are made to the claims of the rights of rulers and the powers and sphere of rulers, and they are all given to Christ.

‘These things says He who has the sharp two-edged sword: “I know your works, and where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is.
Rev 2:12-13

Pergamos was a seat of political influence and power and was the first bastion of Emperor worship. Yet Jesus called that power, the throne of satan - political commentary. Christ does condemn evil governments, and He does not do so within our modern politically correct pluralistic mumbo jumbo. He does so on God’s values, He rules through the Word of God. Notice the image of the sword…. the sword is an image of sovereign power. It is the governments who are intended by God to “not bear the sword in vain” - yet it is Christ who ultimately has the Sword, coming out of His mouth - the Word.

to be continued

Continuing on my Bahnsen Revelation study:

Revelation 2:1-7

“To the angel of the church of Ephesus write, ‘These things says He who holds the seven stars in His right hand, who walks in the midst of the seven golden lampstands: “I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars; and you have persevered and have patience, and have labored for My name’s sake and have not become weary. Nevertheless I have this against you, that you have left your first love. Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place—unless you repent. But this you have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes I will give to eat from the tree of life, which is in the midst of the Paradise of God.’”

The Ephesians were highly praised for testing false teachers and doctrines and having zero tolerance for such. Yet, they had doctrinal purity without the love that they had at the first. Jesus exhorts them to hold on to their hatred of deceitful doctrine, for Jesus Himself hates such, but to regain their first love. Their first love will include the hatred of evil. Notice though that Christ does not hate the Nicolatian persons, but the Nicolatian doctrines. Is that where the Ephesians went wrong? We don’t know. But hating false doctrine is not unloving.

I am listening through Greg Bahnsen’s study on Revelation and will periodically post some thoughts. The series is excellent. He gave me some insight on Revelation 1:7 which confirmed my thesis I have been working on for the past two years, turning it around in my head. That was awesome because it is always great to get confirmation on things one has thought of but has not heard anyone else teach on up to that point. First, it shows the common Spirit uniting us, but second, and note this carefully….

THEOLOGICAL NOVELTY IS NOT A GOOD THING

Usually, not always, especially in an atmosphere of free study and no government coercion of theology or other unnatural influences, if one is the only one or part of a radical fringe (cough - hyperpreterism) there is a very good chance one has over-estimated one’s abilities. Bahsen referred to an early respected commentator that had a similar conclusion, so I am trying to obtain that work, well a translation of that work since it is in German.