Which is Worse, Preterism, D Flesh or Magic Hair?

[Scott Hutchinson]

I knew I mispelt it.

[Apprehended]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

My friend apprehended wasn't Jerusalem called Sodom and Egypt in the bible ?
Here Rev. just for you.
http://judaism.about.com/od/beliefs/a/jesus.htm
Apprehended how is your family doing these days ?

Any church that rejects Jesus (crucifies Him) is spiritually called both Sodom and Egypt. This is done when the two witnesses of separation (drawn out) from the waters of Egypt (Moses) and the One God Truth (Elijah) of "Jehovah is my God" are slain in its streets, it becomes a harlot church comingling its seed with error. See Rev. 11.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Rev

Help me out here.

I think it was in Manly P. Hall's book where those seeking God want to see into the spirit world and see the throne of God?

I had to Google Manly Hall to prompt my own memory - so keep that in consideration.

I haven't read any of his stuff all the way through but I did skim over his text on "religion and myths" that Carl Jung cites frequently some time ago. Hall was the guy that was granted a full 33 degree masonic title by thew Masons without ever even joining a lodge. They looked up to him that much. LOL.

I'm not familiar with the phrase that you mention. Hall is a source for a lot of people looking for syncretism within the Christian church and pagan "source" religions.

[Rev]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I had to Google Manly Hall to prompt my own memory - so keep that in consideration.

I haven't read any of his stuff all the way through but I did skim over his text on "religion and myths" that Carl Jung cites frequently some time ago. Hall was the guy that was granted a full 33 degree masonic title by thew Masons without ever even joining a lodge. They looked up to him that much. LOL.

I'm not familiar with the phrase that you mention. Hall is a source for a lot of people looking for syncretism within the Christian church and pagan "source" religions.

According to Manly P. hall's book "Secret Teachings of All Ages".

"The entire solar system is properly the Mercavah, or chariot of God".

But that is not the one I'm thinking of. I can see the picture but don't know where it is.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Apprehended

OK,

Neither can it be said that Jerusalem committed adultery with Rome since comingling seed in a love relationship is not a natural act. Hence, it would be impossible to commit adultery with Jerusalem since Rome never had ANY spiritual life having spiritual seed to mix with Jerusalem. The only relationship that Rome had with Jerusalem was a natural one.

It is not spiritual adultery only if there is spiritual life to impart to Jerusalem. Where did that idea come from? Spiritual adultery is going to another "love" instead of God. God said Jerusalem committed adultery by going to Assyria, Canaan, etc.

Ezekiel 16:28-29 KJV Thou hast played the whore also with the Assyrians, because thou wast unsatiable; yea, thou hast played the harlot with them, and yet couldest not be satisfied. (29) Thou hast moreover multiplied thy fornication in the land of Canaan unto Chaldea; and yet thou wast not satisfied herewith.

Ezekiel 16:32 KJV But as a wife that committeth adultery, which taketh strangers instead of her husband!

Jerusalem chose Caesar as her king instead of Christ. That is spiritual adultery.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by pelathais

It's difficult to see pre-70 A.D. Jerusalem being involved in any "adultery" with Rome. The judgement that fell upon Jerusalem in 70, came from Rome and was prompted by Judea's continual rebelliousness.

For preterism to make such a strong appeal to the imagery of Jerusalems' alleged "adultery" with Rome - and to take up so much time and space with that argument weakens preterism's cause tremendously in my mind. Pre-70 AD "Jerusalem" simply had no connection with Rome that could in any way be called adultery.

On the contrary. Jesus came as Jerusalem's king in Matt 21. She rejected Him. When He was standing before them in custody by Pilate, Jerusalem cried "We have no king but Caesar!" Rome was the fourth beast. This was no casual statement. It is then that they cried for His blood to be upon them and their children (that generation).

Jerusalem and Rome continued their "affair" after they crucified the Lord in their union, by persecuting the church in Acts. Acts 4 actually uses the same terms Rev 17 used in saying THE KINGS OF THE EARTH joined together with Israel. Who were those kings? Acts 4 says Herod, Pontius Pilate and the gentiles. Rome was the world power. Hence, her leaders were the kings of the earth.

Now, a Futurist could have a field day pointing to "adultery" between "Christian Jerusalem" (the Church) and her "adultery" with Rome. There's a wealth of material to work with there. But how can Preterism say that Jewish Jerusalem had anything at all to do with Rome, other than as an unruly Roman occupied territory.

The harlot rode the back of the beast and crucified her Groom. They rejected the government of God and appealed to Caesar as her king. Despite her abhorrence with Rome, Jerusalem claimed Caesar over Jesus... no small thing.

As I said before, the Old Testament is the template which is used to "decode" the Revelation.

Exactly.

I believe we both see the importance of that. One of those "clues" to understanding Revelation is the parallel between Revelation 11 and Ezekiel 40. In both cases we have a prophet being told to "measure" a ruined temple.

As I stated afore, all of Ezekiel parallels all of Revelation. From the roll that was written within and without and eaten by ezekiel corresponding to Rev 5 and Rev 10, and hair of Ezekiel being divided into three parts in Ezek 5, representing Jerusalem, to the division of the Great City in three parts in Rev 16:19, all the way to the new Jerusalem mentioned at the end of Ezekiel and Revelation, it is parallel front to back. And JERUSALEM was identified as the ONLY whore in the entire bible, while being a city.

Most Preterist writers have attempted to use Revelation 11 as "proof" that the temple was still standing when Revelation was written. It was reading Preterist literature that led me back to Ezekiel and this point and a rejection of Preterism.

Rev 11 is not the proof. The temple is symbolic of God's real people, not the natural temple of Jerusalem. The overall message of Old Testament imagery UNDER LAW, when law is only written to those under Law -- Israel alone -- shows Israel to be the recipients of Law's curses listed in Revelation. Revelation cannot take curses of the law and infer these curses fall on those outside Israel, when Law is ONLY written to those under law, Israel.

And remember, "Idealism" was your tag for me.

I only read you mention it first recently, not me.

I accepted it for the purposes of discussion and because it does provide a suitable framework for further investigation. However, I am a lifelong Dispensationalist who really hasn't settled down comfortably into any particular school of thought. I do reject the dire outlook associated with Dispensationalism and many other forms of Futurism.

Do you agree with dispensationalism's biggest distinction of proposing Israel will come to God OUTSIDE the church age??

For me, Bible prophecy accurately informs us about "what happens" as much as about "what will happen."

Agreed. But the issue of the changeover from Old Covenant to New, and from Old Israel to New, and Old Jerusalem to New is a HUGE issue that makes far more sense to be the relevance of Revelation, than a didactic idea, although I see didactic points in the book as well.

To me, Revelation is the great changeover from Israel to fullness of Church existence, and all the mopping up that occurred as a result of rejection by Israel. The rejection of Israel by Jesus and their judgment cannot be so easily overlooked. It may be a small matter to us, but it was monstrous in God's eyes. It is, in fact, a major emphasis in all the epistles! Why would Revelation be any different? Yeah, there is, again, a didactic message in Revelation. But in every historical record in the Bible can we find didactic lessons to be learned. God deals with anybody in the general way he deals with the rest of us.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Apprehended

The idea that Jerusalem was in love with Rome or that Rome was so much in love with Jerusalem to the extent that IT was copulating with IT is so far beyond the realm of reality until it is totally nonsense.

I can understand how a church can comingle seed with false seed and thus be regarded as adultery but not in the manner as presented by the Preterist.

jmho...

The harlot has daughters, also harlots. Rome and Jerusalem commingled to produce the biggest denomination in the world, comprised of pagan Roman teachings coupled with Old Testament Judaic LAW, and many other denominations. What could be more plain?

Anytime Jerusalem messed with Assyria, Canaan, Egypt, etc., God called it an adultery.

Ezekiel 16:26-34 KJV Thou hast also committed fornication with the Egyptians thy neighbours, great of flesh; and hast increased thy whoredoms, to provoke me to anger. (27) Behold, therefore I have stretched out my hand over thee, and have diminished thine ordinary food, and delivered thee unto the will of them that hate thee, the daughters of the Philistines, which are ashamed of thy lewd way. (28) Thou hast played the whore also with the Assyrians, because thou wast unsatiable; yea, thou hast played the harlot with them, and yet couldest not be satisfied. (29) Thou hast moreover multiplied thy fornication in the land of Canaan unto Chaldea; and yet thou wast not satisfied herewith. (30) How weak is thine heart, saith the Lord GOD, seeing thou doest all these things, the work of an imperious whorish woman; (31) In that thou buildest thine eminent place in the head of every way, and makest thine high place in every street; and hast not been as an harlot, in that thou scornest hire; (32) But as a wife that committeth adultery, which taketh strangers instead of her husband! (33) They give gifts to all whores: but thou givest thy gifts to all thy lovers, and hirest them, that they may come unto thee on every side for thy whoredom. (34) And the contrary is in thee from other women in thy whoredoms, whereas none followeth thee to commit whoredoms: and in that thou givest a reward, and no reward is given unto thee, therefore thou art contrary.

The above passage regarding JERUSALEM absolutely refutes your point.

Was this about Jerusalem?

Ezekiel 16:2 KJV Son of man, cause Jerusalem to know her abominations,

Yes it was.

So to say there is no adultery with Rome by Jerusalem because you cannot see any "copulation" involved is nonsense in light of what we read in Ezekiel 16 about Jerusalem ADULTERATING with Egypt, Assyria and Canaan. How can God;'s word say Jerusalem ADULTERATED with Assyria, Egypt and Canaan, if you claim there is no life giving SEED in a nation such as Rome? What made Rome different from Assyria, Egypt and Canaan? None. Your idea of what constitutes adultery of Jerusalem is in error based upon Ezekiel 16's plain use of the term.

My thoughts, anyway!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by mfblume

The harlot has daughters, also harlots. Rome and Jerusalem commingled to produce the biggest denomination in the world, comprised of pagan Roman teachings coupled with Old Testament Judaic LAW, and many other denominations. What could be more plain?

Anytime Jerusalem messed with Assyria, Canaan, Egypt, etc., God called it an adultery.

The above passage regarding JERUSALEM absolutely refutes your point.

Was this about Jerusalem?

Yes it was.

So to say there is no adultery with Rome by Jerusalem because you cannot see any "copulation" involved is nonsense in light of what we read in Ezekiel 16 about Jerusalem ADULTERATING with Egypt, Assyria and Canaan. How can God;'s word say Jerusalem ADULTERATED with Assyria, Egypt and Canaan, if you claim there is no life giving SEED in a nation such as Rome? What made Rome different from Assyria, Egypt and Canaan? None. Your idea of what constitutes adultery of Jerusalem is in error based upon Ezekiel 16's plain use of the term.

My thoughts, anyway!

Thanks, Brother Blume. This is what I have always believed.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Which is worse?

Divine Flesh is the worst, as it changes our Kinsman Redeemer into something other than what he is.

[Apprehended]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by mfblume

The harlot has daughters, also harlots. Rome and Jerusalem commingled to produce the biggest denomination in the world, comprised of pagan Roman teachings coupled with Old Testament Judaic LAW, and many other denominations. What could be more plain?

It was not Rome who comingled seed with Jerusalem or even an Apostolic Church. Harlotry is the comingling the seed of faith with error which leads to apostasy. The father of LIES seduced the Apostolic church and produced daughters of harlotry. The city of Rome had nothing to do with it.

Anytime Jerusalem messed with Assyria, Canaan, Egypt, etc., God called it an adultery.

This was centurys before Jerusalem, the city of truth died to become wasted, desolated, forsaken and cut off. There was no longer any vitality of truth or good remaining in Jerusalem as prophesied by almost all the prophets and confirmed by Jesus while he was still here. At the writings of Revelation, Jerusalem WAS DEAD, having forsaken her savior. It was impossible for her to comingle seed with anything.

No truth remained in her at all. She was dead. Cut off. Wasted. Desolated. She had no seed to comingle with error or error represented by other nations such as Rome, Assyria, Egypt or anything. The rejection of Jesus by Jerusalem finished her off. She was not resurrected at the time of the writing of Revelation to have truth in her to comingle with error represented by a city such a Rome or any other city.