Did The Second Coming Happen In 70AD? - Page 10

Evang.Benincasa · #91 11-21-2018, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esaias

My understanding is that most preterists believe resurrection took place in AD 70 as a judicial change of position, not that everybody was raised from the dead physically, but that a change took place in which the departed saints went to heaven and all living saints join with them in heaven when they die. Also, that the same thing applies to the lost: the wicked dead were cast into the lake of fire and all since then who die lost are resurrected into damnation as well. So the resurrection in AD 70 is more of a change of circumstances for mankind relative to their destiny as opposed to an event in which bodies come out of graves.

Of course, not being a preterist myself, I may have this all wrong. Apologies if I am mistaken, I do not want to misrepresent anything.

No, you are a 100% correct as per usual.

1ofthechosen · #92 11-21-2018, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esaias

My understanding is that most preterists believe resurrection took place in AD 70 as a judicial change of position, not that everybody was raised from the dead physically, but that a change took place in which the departed saints went to heaven and all living saints join with them in heaven when they die. Also, that the same thing applies to the lost: the wicked dead were cast into the lake of fire and all since then who die lost are resurrected into damnation as well. So the resurrection in AD 70 is more of a change of circumstances for mankind relative to their destiny as opposed to an event in which bodies come out of graves.

Of course, not being a preterist myself, I may have this all wrong. Apologies if I am mistaken, I do not want to misrepresent anything.

Is this more classical pretrist thought? Did Classic Pretrism get created by the Jesuits, is that true?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism

And if so EB whats the difference in what you believe and this? Are they the same? Or only the same term used?

Evang.Benincasa · #93 11-21-2018, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Is this more classical pretrist thought? Did Classic Pretrism get created by the Jesuits, is that true?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism

And if so EB whats the difference in what you believe and this? Are they the same? Or only the same term used?

I believe ehsacly as Esaias posted. Jesuits didn't create anything but the CIA.

1ofthechosen · #94 11-21-2018, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esaias

My understanding is that most preterists believe resurrection took place in AD 70 as a judicial change of position, not that everybody was raised from the dead physically, but that a change took place in which the departed saints went to heaven and all living saints join with them in heaven when they die. Also, that the same thing applies to the lost: the wicked dead were cast into the lake of fire and all since then who die lost are resurrected into damnation as well. So the resurrection in AD 70 is more of a change of circumstances for mankind relative to their destiny as opposed to an event in which bodies come out of graves.

Of course, not being a preterist myself, I may have this all wrong. Apologies if I am mistaken, I do not want to misrepresent anything.

Can you explain what you mean by "a judicial change", or "a change of circumstances". Like Heaven and Hell are real and at hand now? No more soul sleep as MTD would put it, like from 70 AD on straight to hell or straight to glory one way trip? If so I can agree with that kind of, but why 70 AD what was the Importance of that year, and time period?

Esaias · #95 11-21-2018, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Is this more classical pretrist thought? Did Classic Pretrism get created by the Jesuits, is that true?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism

And if so EB whats the difference in what you believe and this? Are they the same? Or only the same term used?

Older preterism maintained a future bodily resurrection, Second Advent, etc (much like partial preterism). It's main distinctive was referring the bulk of Revelation to either pre-Constantinian Rome, or to Nero's persecutions, in opposition to historicism which views Revelation as spanning most or all of church history.

Esaias · #96 11-21-2018, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Can you explain what you mean by "a judicial change", or "a change of circumstances". Like Heaven and Hell are real and at hand now? No more soul sleep as MTD would put it, like from 70 AD on straight to hell or straight to glory one way trip? If so I can agree with that kind of, but why 70 AD what was the Importance of that year, and time period?

I'm not sure I'm the one to explain that. By judicial change I mean a change in God's arrangement of things. Prior, everyone slept in death. In AD70 the Levitical Old Covenant system was completely ended and the New Covenant system was fully operational. So, no more soul sleep.

Again, I'm not a preterist so I don't feel too comfortable examining preterism, I'd rather an actual preterist do so.

JamesGlen · #97 11-21-2018, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesGlen

Paul said his Hope was for BOTH. BOTH
It’s an event of both.
The resurrection of the just AND THE UNJUST was Paul’s hope.

Respectfully, it seems your hope is NOT the same as Paul’s.

It seems you’re attempting to change the scripture to fit your hope.

What did Paul mean when he said his Hope was also in the resurrection of the unjust ?

Acts 24:15

15 I have hope in God, which they themselves also accept, that there will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust.

English grammar isn’t all that complicated here, brother.

Paul’s Hope was in BOTH.
Your hope is not.

Time to re-evaluate your doctrine.

Evang.Benincasa · #98 11-21-2018, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Can you explain what you mean by "a judicial change", or "a change of circumstances". Like Heaven and Hell are real and at hand now? No more soul sleep as MTD would put it, like from 70 AD on straight to hell or straight to glory one way trip? If so I can agree with that kind of, but why 70 AD what was the Importance of that year?

Actually it is not only a date but the month is important.

Head of gold Nebuchadnezzar sacks the first temple 9th of Av 587 and the Roman Iron beats down the temple on the 9th of Av 70 A.D. Daniel 9:24 we have seventy sevens were determined upon Jerusalem for it to complete its transgressions, to make an end for sins and for everlasting righteousness.

Evang.Benincasa · #99 11-21-2018, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesGlen

Acts 24:15

15 I have hope in God, which they themselves also accept, that there will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust.

English grammar isn’t all that complicated here, brother.

Paul’s Hope was in BOTH.

OK, I give up. Are you saying that the hope of Israel was that the unjust would have eternal life? Actually what do you believe happens to the resurrected unjust person?

houston · #**100** 11-21-2018, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Actually it is not only a date but the month is important.

Head of gold Nebuchadnezzar sacks the first temple 9th of Av 587 and the Roman Iron beats down the temple on the 9th of Av 70 A.D. Daniel 9:24 we have seventy sevens were determined upon Jerusalem for it to complete its transgressions, to make an end for sins and for everlasting righteousness.