The Preterists and Matthew 24:34

[tetelestai]

Paul and Peter agree that this body is a house, a tent, a tabernacle in which I(my soul/spirit) dwells and to depart from this body is to be present with the LORD.

Ok, I agree with you so far.

I will abide there in cognizant spirit until the future resurrection of my physical body.

What does that even mean?

Philosophically, I am a 'body/soul dualist' and I believe that Scripture supports this position.

Even if true, that would mean souls of past believers are floating around without a body for hundreds and thousands of years before your rapture takes place.

That sounds pretty strange, and I don't see anything in scripture that supports that.

It's one of the reasons Bullinger invented soul sleep.

According to my view, when a believer today dies, the believer immediately receives his or her glorified body and is instantly in the presence of the Lord. The believer is caught up to be with the Lord and all those who are already there.

 

[tetelestai]

I do ignore him most of the time. We have a history.
Sometimes, I enter the discussion, for the lack of any other topic that interests me. I'm really not torn up about it, though it may appear so, at times.

You're still my favorite Dispy steko.

:chuckle:

 

[musterion]

Ok, to be exact - they were told to repent and believe the Gospel. That was the condition they had to meet to be part of the Kingdom, not the condition that had to be met to usher in the Kingdom.

BINGO. That was the condition. Israel, as a nation (which is what counted) never repented, so none of those events were seen.

What was the Gospel message Christ was preaching? Not his death burial and resurrection. The Good News was that the Kingdom was at hand. It wasn't conditional good news - it was true time fulfilled about to happen good news.

And yet, it hasn't happened yet.

???? Western understandings = intellectual? Do you think you can completely understand the Bible with out recognizing that much of it was written to a Jewish audience who may not have seen things the same way we do?

That is precisely what we consistent dispensationalists consider one of our strengths.

It's not something I'm super comfortable with, but there it is.

No. There's no "there" there. You're not comfortable with it because some part of you recognizes what you're implying about the character of God. You'd best heed it.

How would you understand Ezekiel 5:9?

Does it matter? Why do preterists dote on Bible questions anyway? You admitted in another thread you're not big on answering questions that are put to you, but you continue to ask them of us when you're mind is already made up. What's your goal: that we become preterists? What relevance can the majority of the Bible even have, seeing as much or all of it has been fulfilled?

Maybe after I'm done mopping the floor with you jokers! Mwa ha ha ha! :shut:

Not going to happen.

 

[tetelestai]

Yes, I have noticed that he does that.
Usually, he broad-brushes Dispensationalists, not recognizing or acknowledging distinctions among us.

Sometimes it's hard to keep track of every Dispies stance on every issue.

 

[musterion]

PS

I also find this to be terribly relevant to this discussion, as it's the foundation of everything we (or at least, I) am talking about here. I'm glad you posted it.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

But seriously.

Some of you think Israel actually could receive the Kingdom during Jesus' ministry - some don't. If they could receive the Kingdom Jesus would either be handed over to the Romans so they could do everybody a favor and crucify their newly appointed King - or they would sacrifice Jesus in some ceremonial temple ritual.

I don't think either of those scenarios jive with the prophecies concerning Jesus' being rejected and crucified.

If I were dispensational, I think the logical choice is that Israel could not have received the Kingdom at that time. It was planned that they would reject Jesus and have him crucified - for the larger good of all mankind.

So, let's suppose the expectation was that all of Israel would repent 100% sometime after the crucifixion - perhaps within the next generation.

If that was the case, why does Jesus give prophecies concerning the Kingdom being taken from the Jews for their lack of fruitfulness? Why does he give prophecies like the Olivet Discourse of supposed future worldwide distress and a distant 2nd coming?

This doesn't sound like the expectation/plan of all Israel repenting and believing within the next generation. If Jesus was predicting a distant future 2nd coming, how then was the Kingdom of God at hand?

 

[tetelestai]

And do P.P.s consider full preterists like Tet to be gravely wrong?

I'm not a full preterist.

Satan still has to be released for a little while, the thousand years has not ended yet, the Great White Throne Judgment has not happened yet, etc.

Also, how many times are you going to keep going on about your secret condition in Matt 24:34, when it has been proven to you that Mark 13:30 proves you wrong?

This is just proof that you have absolutely no interest in learning anything, and your only goal is to defend Dispensationalism no matter what it takes.

 

[tetelestai]

Maybe after I'm done mopping the floor with you jokers! Mwa ha ha ha! :shut:

:chuckle:

Darby followers are so predictable.

When they can't defend their false teachings, they try to pit those who point out Darby's errors against each other.

 

[musterion]

So, let's suppose the expectation was that all of Israel would repent 100% sometime after the crucifixion - perhaps within the next generation.

Better idea: Suppose Israel had repented before the Cross, per Luke 13:3 and other verses going back to John the baptizer. What would have happened?

 

[john w]

STP, heir, and John W all adhere to "soul sleep"

Show me the quote, punk, where I "weighed in" on it.


Go ahead, you demon.


Show me.

That's your MO on, TOL, you troll-ette, i.e., satanically spamming accusations against everyone that takes a dispensational stance, lying about it, and then, when challenged to prove the assertion, you slither away, back to your father, the devil.

Soul Sleep was invented by E. W. Bullinger.

For over the 100th time, punk: why, and how, does your spam "invented" cute little bit of sophistry, and deception, do anything, to disprove our assertions, and give credence, validity, to your satanic Preterism/AD 70-ism? it does not, you moron, and you know it.

Does God "invent," Craigie pie?


I thought so, you deceiving punk.

J. Stuart Russell invented Preterism/AD 760-ism.


See how that works, sweetie?

While STP, heir, and John W are Acts 9 and Bullinger was Acts 28, they mostly believe all of Bullinger's other doctrines.

You are a Stuart-ite, and Hanegraaf-ite, believing all that they say, and plagiarizing from them.



Show me, demon, where I ever stated that I am an "Acts 9" proponent.

 

[john w]

STP, heir, and John W all adhere to "soul sleep"

Soul Sleep was invented by E. W. Bullinger.

Tet. Craigie adheres to the assertion that everyone is saved, and that you can "deny that Christ Jesus' one time sacrifice for sin was good enough," and still be saved, that Jesus Christ is not a man, and that the second coming was the Roman army in Jerusalem in AD 70, and denies the resurrection, redemption of the body.


He invented all of that.

 

[steko]

Ok, I agree with you so far.



What does that even mean?

Cognizant means aware, conscious.
The (I) which is me is aware even if apart from the body. (I) am not my physical brain.

As Peter indicates the (I), which is Peter, dwells within the tabernacle which is his body and that he was soon to depart from that body, which I take to mean that the (I) which is me is not the body.

2Pe 1:13 Yea, I think it meet, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance;
2Pe 1:14 Knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath shewed me.

Even if true, that would mean souls of past believers are floating around without a body for hundreds and thousands of years before your rapture takes place.

That sounds pretty strange, and I don't see anything in scripture that supports that.

It's one of the reasons Bullinger invented soul sleep.

Paul indicates in 2Co 5 that the bodiless believer is clothed upon with a house from heaven. The nature of that house is debated by many.
Some believe that it could be an intermediate dwelling prior to the permanent resurrection physical body promised in the future redemption. Some things remain mysterious. I'm fine with that. I trust the LORD can take care of those details.

2Co 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2Co 5:2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
2Co 5:3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
2Co 5:4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

According to my view, when a believer today dies, the believer immediately receives his or her glorified body and is instantly in the presence of the Lord. The believer is caught up to be with the Lord and all those who are already there.

That's a view that doesn't square with what I see in scripture, but you're certainly free to believe it, even if it's wrong.
I do believe with Paul that the believer is instantly in the presence of the LORD at physical death.

 

[john w]

According to my view, when a believer today dies, the believer immediately receives his or her glorified body and is instantly in the presence of the Lord. The believer is caught up to be with the Lord and all those who are already there.

You deny the redemption of the body, promised to members of the body of Christ, which, by definition, is physical, and deny that the Lord Jesus Christ is a man today, in flesh and bone, and thus admit that you pervert the gospel of Christ, 1 Cor. 15: KJV ff.

 

[Interplanner]

Time to calm down and be reasonable, not bringing the demonic world into it.

A simple step will help detangle several things about NT eschatology: to realize that it is either about 1st century Judea OR about a distant future worldwide day of judgement. It does not mix these things.

The reason it is difficult to do this is because it was possible for the final day of judgement to be right after the events in Judea of Mt24A. B starts at v29. But a delay was allowed. We know this from Christ saying he did not know the final day, and from the parable of the attentive servants.

The NT simply does not mix the two things. 99% of eschatological debate is due to thinking they are somehow mixed--that there are future things that need to happen to Israel or that 70 AD was, well, everything. Neither are true.

We now can also understand why 2 Pet 3 was written. It explains and defends the delay, saying it is based on God's grace. It can't mean the Gospel event when it refers to the 'coming;' it must mean the 2nd coming. The delay needed to be explained.

Only Paul's statement in 1 Th 2 remains confusing: why say the wrath of God already is upon Israel? Perhaps on the same basis as Mt 23. The house was already desolate. But this is not a problem of mixing the two above elements.

 

[john w]

:chuckle:

Darby followers are so predictable.

When they can't defend their false teachings, they try to pit those who point out Darby's errors against each other.

spam=he is getting picked apart, again, so he spams his "Darby" tumper.

His wife must be laughing at him, like TOL.

 

[john w]

Time to calm down and be reasonable, not bringing the demonic world into it

Request denied. Craigie Tet. is a demon. I don't negotiate with communists, wolves, or demons. Why do you?

Save it-rhetorical q-have a seat.

 

[john w]

:chuckle:

Darby followers are so predictable.

When they can't defend their false teachings, they try to pit those who point out Darby's errors against each other.

Your so predictable- a habitual liar, a wimp, afraid of me, and addressing:

"Not to mention, Darby followers deny that Christ Jesus' one time sacrifice for sin was good enough. They claim people in the future will have to sacrifice animals for sin atonement."-Craigie Tet.

Tet. says we are lost.


Right, wimp?

Not a peep, from the Preterist perverter.

 

[musterion]

Time to calm down and be reasonable, not bringing the demonic world into it.

Don't. Just...don't.

 

[tetelestai]

to realize that it is either about 1st century Judea OR about a distant future worldwide day of judgement. It does not mix these things.

Which is why Christ Jesus said "JUDAEA" in His prophecies.

Judaea was a Roman Province.

There isn't going to be another Judaea

Yet Dispensationalists claim people will flee to the mountains from Judaea in the future.

Dispensationalism is a mess.

 

[tetelestai]

It explains and defends the delay, saying it is based on God's grace.

There was a 40 year delay with the Exodus Generation also.

The Exodus Generation were led by Moses from physical bondage, through physical water into a physical Promised Land. However, they committed idolatry, and the entrance into the Promised Land was delayed 40 years.

In the first century, the First Century Generation of Jews were led from the spiritual bondage of sin by Christ Jesus into a spiritual Promised Land. However, they rejected their Messiah and the entrance into the spiritual Promised Land was delayed 40 years.

Moses took a census, there was a census in Luke 2

"This Generation" was a phrase Christ Jesus used many times.