The Partial Preterist Believers Safe House

[Tra Phull]

Reading back over page one of this safe house thread - it seems that those posting here should be partial Preterist, and those not of that persuasion should post "in fellowship" only.

Is that how you guys see things?

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

What 100 chapters do you speak of?

This is an article I wrote about just three of them in Isaiah. It's short. Just points out the obvious.
The Bride of Christ

 

[Al Touthentop]

Partial Preterism, the older of the two views, holds that prophecies such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the Antichrist, the Great Tribulation, and the advent of the Day of the Lord as a "judgment-coming" of Christ were fulfilled circa 70 AD when the Roman general (and future Emperor) Titus sacked Jerusalem and destroyed the Jewish Temple, putting a permanent stop to the daily animal sacrifices. It identifies "Babylon the great" (Revelation 17-18) with the ancient pagan City of Rome or Jerusalem.

​

I really hate labels. I consider myself a simple follower of Christ and God's word, though not perfect in this endeavor by any means. I came to a believe that Matthew 24 couldn't be talking about the second coming for a few reasons, not the least of which was his statement that everything he had just said was going to happen within the lifetime of those listening. While his language seemed to contradict his claim.

But how absurd would it be on the last day for people to try and escape the resurrection by fleeing to the hills above Jerusalem?

I also view the insistence of certain teachers to make Ezekiel 16 and 48 (and Daniel 9) about a future rebuilding of the temple and establishment of the kingdom as a rejection of the Christ. If those scriptures aren't fulfilled, we're still waiting for Christ's FIRST arrival, not his second.

 

[Murray J]

Members who chose to participate in this safe house should be partial preterists. This thread is for discussing end time events and prophecy (Biblical) from a partial preterists point of view. Fellowship posts from all members are welcome.

• This safe house thread is for those members who believe in the partial preterism.

• The safe house is for discussion and not for debate. Debate is defined as: "Engaging in argument by discussing opposing points."

• If a topic turns into a debate then staff will split the debate off into a new thread.

• Members who do not believe in partial preterism may post in fellowship only.

• No posts from this safe house may be quoted in other threads or used to start discussion threads in the main Eschatology forum.

Jesus told Caiaphas the High Priest that he personally would see Jesus coming in the clouds so Jesus must have come before Caiaphas died (Math 26:64). And Luke 21:32 says all the things Jesus spoke about would come about before the end of that generation which ties in with Caiaphas still being alive. And Jesus told John not to seal the Revelation (Rev 22:10) because it was the time of the end (whereas He had told Daniel to seal that prophecy because it was not the time of the end.) And Jesus told His apostles they wouldn't have gone through all the cities of Israel before he returned (Math 10:23.) So Jesus returned sometime during the end of that generation in the clouds and took His disciples to his Father's House as he had promised them he would (John 14:2-3.)

 

[FulfilledInHim]

Glad to be here. I am also glad there are others like me out there!

 

[FulfilledInHim]

I would like to discuss The resurrection though....a topic i am back and forth about. I am pretty confident that without The Resurrection happening already, Heaven would still be essentially Empty (the Father, the Son and the Spirit not being excluded of course) 1John 5:7. But if we are to say 1Thes 4 was fulfilled at the Judgement by 70AD, than we must also conclude that those who slept in Jesus whom He brought with Him had to already be resurrected and then those who were alive and remained were resurrected right after that.

Therefore the resurrection had to have happened then.

Is my interpretation wrong here ?

 

[Daniel Martinovich]

Yes and no. Yes your right that the people who have died are in heaven or hell. What you are wrong about is that you believe there is a one or two time event called the resurrection . This is from a paper I wrote.

1. That depending on the context of the verses the word resurrection is used to convey the idea that there is immediate life after death that includes a physical body. (Not physical as we know physical, but a physical body none the less.)


Matthew 22: 23-32. The same day the Sadducees came to him (Jesus), which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him………… 29. Jesus answered and said to them, You err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 30. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. 31. But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have you not read that which was spoken to you by God, saying, 32. I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living 33. And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine. Jesus directly used the term “the resurrection” to describe the fact that the patriarchs were alive, not dead and the multitude was astonished by this statement. Why would that be? The belief that there was life after death was held by the vast majority of the multitude. They were certainly not astonished that Jesus would say the Patriarchs were alive anymore than Christians today would not be astonished; it is something they already believe. One can only assume they were astonished because they understood Jesus to say the Patriarchs were already resurrected, something that they understood to be a one time future event at the end of the world. As Martha states here: John 11: 23. Jesus said to her, Your brother shall rise again. 24. Martha said to him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. 25. Jesus said to her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: It was not unusual for Christ to differ with the culturally accepted beliefs of his day. What is strange, is that this scripture messes with consensus views of Christians today; as if nothing has ever changed in what believers hold to be true.
Here's an example to bring the significance of this scripture to light. Say there was a funeral of a child who from a family where they were all professing Christians. How often would their fellow Christians seek to comfort them with the words, "your child is in a better place , he is with Jesus now alive and happy and will be in heaven waiting for you." It's comforting and true! Yet if someone said the same words like this: "He is with Jesus now resurrected and happy and will be in heaven waiting for you." There would be looks of puzzlement, people may be offended, in fact the person in question may get a call from the pastor. Yet this is exactly how Jesus used the word resurrection, to describe the fact of immediate life after death that has nothing to do with dead bodies made alive, graves opening or future events.
There is something further to notice about Jesus’ answer in Matthew 22:30 concerning the physical nature of the simple life after death resurrected body: For in the resurrection they ….. are as the angels of God in heaven. The Bible calls angels spirits in Hebrews 1:14. Are they not all ministering spirits..... Yet angels throughout the scripture have physical bodies. They may not be physical as we understand physical, but in the scriptures they eat, drink, appear, disappear, walk through walls, are constantly mistaken for men, and take on different form, walk in fire, etc. etc. The point being is that our "inward" man is a spirit, just like the angels are spirits. We are not a cloud or a mist that floats around when these bodies die. When we step out of these bodies we step out on feet, we have legs, we have a body. It is physical, just not flesh and bone as we know physical right now. This can be seen in great detail in the scriptures below.
Here are three Bible stories that demonstrate point #1 again but also point #3 where a mans earthy physical body was changed into a heavenly physical body. Deuteronomy 34: 5. So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab , according to the word of the Lord. 6. And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knows of his tomb unto this day. 2 Kings 2:11. And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, which separated the two of them; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. Luke 9: 28. About eight days after Jesus said this, he took Peter, John and James with him and went up to a mountain to pray. 29. As he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became as bright as a flash of lightning. 30. Two men, Moses and Elijah, 31.Appeared in glorious splendor, talking with Jesus. They spoke about his departure, which he was about to bring to fulfillment at Jerusalem.: We have two men. One of them, Moses; died, buried, his body still in the ground. The other Elijah, caught away to heaven. Yet here they are, both speaking to Jesus with the same bodies: they are alive, resurrected, and they have the appearance of angels. If resurrection is a one time future event how did this make it into the Bible? Moses has the same body as Elijah, Moses dead and buried and Elijah "raptured." See how this fits into the narrative of Jesus that in the resurrection they are physically. like the angels?
In another example of point #1 we have a story that includes someone who did not go to heaven but hell: Luke 16: 19. There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day. 20. And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, 21. And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. 22. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23. And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and sees Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. 25. But Abraham said, Son, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and you are tormented. 26. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from here to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from there. 27. Then he said, I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father's house: 28. For I have five brothers; that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment. 29. Abraham answered him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30. And he said, No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will repent. 31. And he said to him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. This is not the end of the world; the rich man still has unbelieving kinfolk on earth, and Jesus said there "was" a certain rich man, indicating this happened in the past, before Christ and the NT. Also these individuals have physical bodies that are recognizable; the rich man recognizes both Lazarus and Abraham. Then there is the use of this language: he lifted up his eyes and saw; he is thirsty and wants a drop of water on his tongue because he is tormented in fire, clearly indicating a body. Plus he still cares for the welfare of his family even though he is in hell. These are not awaiting resurrection, they are already resurrected and it is the past. So how can it be said that the Bible teaches a one time future event called the resurrection when we have these examples of people already resurrected?

Resurrection

 

[William Lefranc]

Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not. Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh. -- Matt. 25:1-13

Stryper - Not That Kind Of Guy. - YouTube

What's your take on this parable? How did Jesus link this parable with Israel, who were the five virgins that fell asleep without enough oil (preparation), and what's the meaning of the marriage celebration?

 

[Freedm]

I would like to discuss The resurrection though....a topic i am back and forth about. I am pretty confident that without The Resurrection happening already, Heaven would still be essentially Empty (the Father, the Son and the Spirit not being excluded of course) 1John 5:7. But if we are to say 1Thes 4 was fulfilled at the Judgement by 70AD, than we must also conclude that those who slept in Jesus whom He brought with Him had to already be resurrected and then those who were alive and remained were resurrected right after that.

Therefore the resurrection had to have happened then.

Is my interpretation wrong here ?

I too would like to discuss the resurrection. My position on this has changed over the years, and changed again recently.

First I believed that we go to heaven or hell immediately upon death, and that it's always been this way. I believed this because that's what I was taught.

Then as I studied the Bible and found verses like "For dust you are and to dust you will return" and "The dead know nothing" and "I will resurrect all who belong to me on the last day" I came to believe that we actually just sleep in the earth until the very last day of time, at which point we are resurrected into spiritual bodies and can enter into heaven.

Now I'm leaning towards a hybrid of these two and I'd love to know what other thinks of this. It can't be denied that the old testament is full of proof that we sleep in the dust of the earth when we die, however the new testament is much less clear on this and in fact somewhat ambiguous with statements like "to be absent from the body is to be with the lord", and so I'm wondering if this arrangement of death was modified when the old covenant was removed.

Primarily I'm taking my cues from Daniel 12.

In Daniel chapter 12 we see that the angel tells Daniel that he must rest until the end of days when many will come out of their graves; some to everlasting righteousness and some to everlasting contempt. I had always seen this as a description of the final resurrection on the very last day of time, but I'm realizing now that many references to "the last days" were actually references to the last days of the old covenant, and given that Daniel's visions all pertained to the time leading up to the end of the last covenant, and that the destruction of the temple ushered in the thousand years during which the saints reign with Christ, but most importantly that the angel's description of the resurrection started with "at that time", I wonder if there was a physical resurrection of all who had died up until that point in 70 AD, and if that was the first resurrection, with a second to come at the end of time.

Thoughts?

 

[Freedm]

What's your take on this parable? How did Jesus link this parable with Israel, who were the five virgins that fell asleep without enough oil (preparation), and what's the meaning of the marriage celebration?

I believe the marriage celebration referred to the consummation of the new covenant when the old was destroyed in 70 AD. In other words, we are now married to Christ through the new covenant.

The virgin bit is a bit less clear but perhaps refers to those early Christians who did not heed Christ's warning about armies surrounding Jerusalem and did not flee to the mountains of Pella as the other Christians did. On the other hand Josephus claims that not a single Christian was killed in Jerusalem, and all escaped. Perhaps the five virgins represent those who had heard the message from Christ but did not take it seriously and therefore can not be counted as Christians.

 

[Freedm]

But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have you not read that which was spoken to you by God, saying, 32. I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living 33. And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine. Jesus directly used the term “the resurrection” to describe the fact that the patriarchs were alive, not dead and the multitude was astonished by this statement.

I did not read your entire post because without paragraph breaks it's hard to read and easy to lose interest, but I do want to ask you about this statement you made here. You said "Jesus directly used the term 'the resurrection' to describe the fact that the patriarchs were alive, not dead and the multitude was astonished by this statement".

I'm not sure he "directly" said that, but rather that you inferred it. Isn't it possible that he was saying the patriarchs would be resurrected (and perhaps soon), not that they had already been resurrected at that time?

 

[parousia70]

I too would like to discuss the resurrection. My position on this has changed over the years, and changed again recently.

First I believed that we go to heaven or hell immediately upon death, and that it's always been this way. I believed this because that's what I was taught.

Then as I studied the Bible and found verses like "For dust you are and to dust you will return" and "The dead know nothing" and "I will resurrect all who belong to me on the last day" I came to believe that we actually just sleep in the earth until the very last day of time, at which point we are resurrected into spiritual bodies and can enter into heaven.

Now I'm leaning towards a hybrid of these two and I'd love to know what other thinks of this. It can't be denied that the old testament is full of proof that we sleep in the dust of the earth when we die, however the new testament is much less clear on this and in fact somewhat ambiguous with statements like "to be absent from the body is to be with the lord", and so I'm wondering if this arrangement of death was modified when the old covenant was removed.

Primarily I'm taking my cues from Daniel 12.

In Daniel chapter 12 we see that the angel tells Daniel that he must rest until the end of days when many will come out of their graves; some to everlasting righteousness and some to everlasting contempt. I had always seen this as a description of the final resurrection on the very last day of time, but I'm realizing now that many references to "the last days" were actually references to the last days of the old covenant, and given that Daniel's visions all pertained to the time leading up to the end of the last covenant, and that the destruction of the temple ushered in the thousand years during which the saints reign with Christ, but most importantly that the angel's description of the resurrection started with "at that time", I wonder if there was a physical resurrection of all who had died up until that point in 70 AD, and if that was the first resurrection, with a second to come at the end of time.

Thoughts?

Resurrection of the dead is a very sensible, scriptural doctrine from the preterist view.

#1) The dead are all those who finished their lives on planet earth. They are a category of people -- the dead.

#2) In Paul's time, and going all the way back to Adam, the dead went to Hades/Sheol at their physical deaths. This place was NOT Heaven and it was NOT the lake of fire (commonly known as "hell" in today's parlance). Those places weren't prepared yet.

#3) The bible then teaches WHEN Hades/Sheol was to be destroyed (Rev 20:12-15; 1 Cor 15:55-55), giving up the dead.

Preterists maintain that 1 Cor 15:55-56 clearly lists that Hades/Sheol was destoyed when the Age of the Law of Moses came to its end:

1 Corinthians 15:54-56
then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, 'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O HADES is thy victory?' And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW

That is the victory slogan when the resurrection of the dead happens. All agree on that.

We are not still waiting for Hades to be destroyed. We are not still waiting for the Law of Moses to reach its end. We are not still waiting for the dead to be raised out of Hades and taken into their eternal inheritance in Heaven or eternal punishment in the Lake of Fire ("hell" in common parlance). All the dead are now either in Heaven's eternal bliss or in hell. There is no Hadean realm anymore. Hades was destroyed when the dead were raised out of it (1 Cor 15:55-56; Rev 20:12-15).

The Law Age was forever ended at the destruction of the Temple. That age had run its appointed course of time (Gal 3:19,24-25; Gal 4:4-5). We know that the Old Covenant was still hanging on to God's people as of Heb 8:13 (see also 2 Cor 3:6-12; Gal 4:24-25; Gal 4:8-12; Col 2:16-22, Acts 21:20-26, etc), but that Old Covenant was about to vanish (Heb 8:13; Heb 10:9) -- it did fully vanish at AD 70 when Christ's prophecies about the Temple came to pass.

Look very closely at the saying that "death is swallowed up in victory." Look how Paul ties it to the end of the Age of the Mosaic Law and NOT the end of the New Covenant Age (which had barely even begun yet). Paul writes:

'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O Hades is thy victory?' And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW -- 1 Cor 15:55-56

It was The Law of Moses that was preventing the saints from entering Heaven due to it's condemnation of the saints. Paul sees the victory over death to be tied to the removal of the Law Age, which was centered in the Temple system instituted by God and not destroyed until AD 70. Christ had very much to say about the destruction of the Temple.

Paul was living in the last days of the Old Testament Age when Resurrection was about to happen (Romans 13:11; Acts 24:15), -- it was even to occur in their lifetimes as Paul fully expected and taught (1 Thess 4:15 -- "WE who are alive and remain..."). Acts 24:15 says:

Acts 24:15
having hope toward God, which they themselves also wait for, that THERE IS ABOUT TO BE a rising again of the dead, both of righteous and unrighteous (Young's LITERAL translation)

Indeed, Jesus was resurrected out of Hades at AD 30 and Paul was expecting the rest of the O.T. saints to exit Hades and join Christ in Heaven's bliss very, very, soon. They hadn't yet, but Paul promised that the Hebrews 11 O.T. saints were destined to receive their promise in Paul's generation (Hebrews 11:39-40).

Does Paul tie Resurrection (which he taught was ABOUT TO happen in their lifetimes -- Acts 24:15; Romans 13:11, 1 Thess 4:15) to the end of the New Covenant Age? Absolutely not. Does Paul tie the institution of Resurrection to the end of the Old Testament Age? The answer is ABSOLUTELY YES. Paul ties the institution of Resurrection to the removal of THE OLD COVENANT LAW OF MOSES. Paul teaches that the sting and victory of death (which futurists teach have not yet been eradicated) exists due to SIN POWERED BY THE LAW OF MOSES! (1 Cor 15:56). Look at it carefully one last time:

1 Corinthians 15:54-56
and when this corruptible may have put on incorruption, and this mortal may have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, 'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O Hades is thy victory?'[56] And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW.

When the Temple was destroyed at the last trump at AD 70 the dead O.T. saints were instantly taken to Heaven to be with Christ in their eternal inheritance. They are there now and we, the living, are caught up to be with them instantly and exactly as 2 Cor 5:1-2 states:

2 Corinthians 5:1-2
For we know that if the earthly house of our tent is dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens. For most assuredly in this we groan, longing to be clothed with our habitation which is from heaven

 

[Freedm]

Resurrection of the dead is a very sensible, scriptural doctrine from the preterist view.

#1) The dead are all those who finished their lives on planet earth. They are a category of people -- the dead.

#2) In Paul's time, and going all the way back to Adam, the dead went to Hades/Sheol at their physical deaths. This place was NOT Heaven and it was NOT the lake of fire (commonly known as "hell" in today's parlance). Those places weren't prepared yet.

#3) The bible then teaches WHEN Hades/Sheol was to be destroyed (Rev 20:12-15; 1 Cor 15:55-55), giving up the dead.

Preterists maintain that 1 Cor 15:55-56 clearly lists that Hades/Sheol was destoyed when the Age of the Law of Moses came to its end:

1 Corinthians 15:54-56
then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, 'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O HADES is thy victory?' And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW

That is the victory slogan when the resurrection of the dead happens. All agree on that.

We are not still waiting for Hades to be destroyed. We are not still waiting for the Law of Moses to reach its end. We are not still waiting for the dead to be raised out of Hades and taken into their eternal inheritance in Heaven or eternal punishment in the Lake of Fire ("hell" in common parlance). All the dead are now either in Heaven's eternal bliss or in hell. There is no Hadean realm anymore. Hades was destroyed when the dead were raised out of it (1 Cor 15:55-56; Rev 20:12-15).

The Law Age was forever ended at the destruction of the Temple. That age had run its appointed course of time (Gal 3:19,24-25; Gal 4:4-5). We know that the Old Covenant was still hanging on to God's people as of Heb 8:13 (see also 2 Cor 3:6-12; Gal 4:24-25; Gal 4:8-12; Col 2:16-22, Acts 21:20-26, etc), but that Old Covenant was about to vanish (Heb 8:13; Heb 10:9) -- it did fully vanish at AD 70 when Christ's prophecies about the Temple came to pass.

Look very closely at the saying that "death is swallowed up in victory." Look how Paul ties it to the end of the Age of the Mosaic Law and NOT the end of the New Covenant Age (which had barely even begun yet). Paul writes:

'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O Hades is thy victory?' And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW -- 1 Cor 15:55-56

It was The Law of Moses that was preventing the saints from entering Heaven due to it's condemnation of the saints. Paul sees the victory over death to be tied to the removal of the Law Age, which was centered in the Temple system instituted by God and not destroyed until AD 70. Christ had very much to say about the destruction of the Temple.

Paul was living in the last days of the Old Testament Age when Resurrection was about to happen (Romans 13:11; Acts 24:15), -- it was even to occur in their lifetimes as Paul fully expected and taught (1 Thess 4:15 -- "WE who are alive and remain..."). Acts 24:15 says:

Acts 24:15
having hope toward God, which they themselves also wait for, that THERE IS ABOUT TO BE a rising again of the dead, both of righteous and unrighteous (Young's LITERAL translation)

Indeed, Jesus was resurrected out of Hades at AD 30 and Paul was expecting the rest of the O.T. saints to exit Hades and join Christ in Heaven's bliss very, very, soon. They hadn't yet, but Paul promised that the Hebrews 11 O.T. saints were destined to receive their promise in Paul's generation (Hebrews 11:39-40).

Does Paul tie Resurrection (which he taught was ABOUT TO happen in their lifetimes -- Acts 24:15; Romans 13:11, 1 Thess 4:15) to the end of the New Covenant Age? Absolutely not. Does Paul tie the institution of Resurrection to the end of the Old Testament Age? The answer is ABSOLUTELY YES. Paul ties the institution of Resurrection to the removal of THE OLD COVENANT LAW OF MOSES. Paul teaches that the sting and victory of death (which futurists teach have not yet been eradicated) exists due to SIN POWERED BY THE LAW OF MOSES! (1 Cor 15:56). Look at it carefully one last time:

1 Corinthians 15:54-56
and when this corruptible may have put on incorruption, and this mortal may have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, 'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O Hades is thy victory?'[56] And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW.

When the Temple was destroyed at the last trump at AD 70 the dead O.T. saints were instantly taken to Heaven to be with Christ in their eternal inheritance. They are there now and we, the living, are caught up to be with them instantly and exactly as 2 Cor 5:1-2 states:

2 Corinthians 5:1-2
For we know that if the earthly house of our tent is dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens. For most assuredly in this we groan, longing to be clothed with our habitation which is from heaven

Dude, I've been off an on at ChristianForums.com and other similar sites for many years, and I can count on one hand the number of times I read a post that literally opened my eyes, and this post is one of those.

I must've read 1 Corinthians 15 a thousand times, and even used it to prove my point just as many times, but never have I seen the line that you pointed out to me here.

Where, O Hades is thy victory?' And the sting of the death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.

I'm simply amazed how ones eyes can be closed when looking directly at the text and even reading the words out loud. Thank you brother. I really needed this.

 

[ralliann]

Resurrection of the dead is a very sensible, scriptural doctrine from the preterist view.

#1) The dead are all those who finished their lives on planet earth. They are a category of people -- the dead.

#2) In Paul's time, and going all the way back to Adam, the dead went to Hades/Sheol at their physical deaths. This place was NOT Heaven and it was NOT the lake of fire (commonly known as "hell" in today's parlance). Those places weren't prepared yet.

#3) The bible then teaches WHEN Hades/Sheol was to be destroyed (Rev 20:12-15; 1 Cor 15:55-55), giving up the dead.

Preterists maintain that 1 Cor 15:55-56 clearly lists that Hades/Sheol was destoyed when the Age of the Law of Moses came to its end:

1 Corinthians 15:54-56
then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, 'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O HADES is thy victory?' And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW

That is the victory slogan when the resurrection of the dead happens. All agree on that.

We are not still waiting for Hades to be destroyed. We are not still waiting for the Law of Moses to reach its end. We are not still waiting for the dead to be raised out of Hades and taken into their eternal inheritance in Heaven or eternal punishment in the Lake of Fire ("hell" in common parlance). All the dead are now either in Heaven's eternal bliss or in hell. There is no Hadean realm anymore. Hades was destroyed when the dead were raised out of it (1 Cor 15:55-56; Rev 20:12-15).

The Law Age was forever ended at the destruction of the Temple. That age had run its appointed course of time (Gal 3:19,24-25; Gal 4:4-5). We know that the Old Covenant was still hanging on to God's people as of Heb 8:13 (see also 2 Cor 3:6-12; Gal 4:24-25; Gal 4:8-12; Col 2:16-22, Acts 21:20-26, etc), but that Old Covenant was about to vanish (Heb 8:13; Heb 10:9) -- it did fully vanish at AD 70 when Christ's prophecies about the Temple came to pass.

Look very closely at the saying that "death is swallowed up in victory." Look how Paul ties it to the end of the Age of the Mosaic Law and NOT the end of the New Covenant Age (which had barely even begun yet). Paul writes:

'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O Hades is thy victory?' And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW -- 1 Cor 15:55-56

It was The Law of Moses that was preventing the saints from entering Heaven due to it's condemnation of the saints. Paul sees the victory over death to be tied to the removal of the Law Age, which was centered in the Temple system instituted by God and not destroyed until AD 70. Christ had very much to say about the destruction of the Temple.

Paul was living in the last days of the Old Testament Age when Resurrection was about to happen (Romans 13:11; Acts 24:15), -- it was even to occur in their lifetimes as Paul fully expected and taught (1 Thess 4:15 -- "WE who are alive and remain..."). Acts 24:15 says:

Acts 24:15
having hope toward God, which they themselves also wait for, that THERE IS ABOUT TO BE a rising again of the dead, both of righteous and unrighteous (Young's LITERAL translation)

Indeed, Jesus was resurrected out of Hades at AD 30 and Paul was expecting the rest of the O.T. saints to exit Hades and join Christ in Heaven's bliss very, very, soon. They hadn't yet, but Paul promised that the Hebrews 11 O.T. saints were destined to receive their promise in Paul's generation (Hebrews 11:39-40).

Does Paul tie Resurrection (which he taught was ABOUT TO happen in their lifetimes -- Acts 24:15; Romans 13:11, 1 Thess 4:15) to the end of the New Covenant Age? Absolutely not. Does Paul tie the institution of Resurrection to the end of the Old Testament Age? The answer is ABSOLUTELY YES. Paul ties the institution of Resurrection to the removal of THE OLD COVENANT LAW OF MOSES. Paul teaches that the sting and victory of death (which futurists teach have not yet been eradicated) exists due to SIN POWERED BY THE LAW OF MOSES! (1 Cor 15:56). Look at it carefully one last time:

1 Corinthians 15:54-56
and when this corruptible may have put on incorruption, and this mortal may have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the word that hath been written, 'The Death was swallowed up in victory where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O Hades is thy victory?'[56] And the sting of the death is sin, AND THE POWER OF SIN IS THE LAW.

When the Temple was destroyed at the last trump at AD 70 the dead O.T. saints were instantly taken to Heaven to be with Christ in their eternal inheritance. They are there now and we, the living, are caught up to be with them instantly and exactly as 2 Cor 5:1-2 states:

2 Corinthians 5:1-2
For we know that if the earthly house of our tent is dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens. For most assuredly in this we groan, longing to be clothed with our habitation which is from heaven

Just a thought when reading this post.

Mt 27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

 

[parousia70]

Just a thought when reading this post.

Mt 27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

My belief is that these were not resurrections but resuscitations, akin to that of Lazarus’, and we have no teaching to counter the view that like Lazarus, they went on to physically die again.

 

[Freedm]

That's an interesting point. Yes, I too see that those people were resurrected physically, but did not gain immortality, whereas the resurrection in 70 AD would've resurrected people in immortal spirit form.

 

[ralliann]

That's an interesting point. Yes, I too see that those people were resurrected physically, but did not gain immortality, whereas the resurrection in 70 AD would've resurrected people in immortal spirit form.

It does not say that they had heavenly bodies. But they were dead and raised up from the grave. We don't even know enough to say they died again. Elijah was taken up without a resurrected body. Enoch was no more because he was taken. We just cannot say beyond what the text witness tells us.

 

[parousia70]

It does not say that they had heavenly bodies. But they were dead and raised up from the grave. We don't even know enough to say they died again. Elijah was taken up without a resurrected body. Enoch was no more because he was taken. We just cannot say beyond what the text witness tells us.

How then, do you see that event relating to my Post #572?

 

[Freedm]

It does not say that they had heavenly bodies. But they were dead and raised up from the grave. We don't even know enough to say they died again. Elijah was taken up without a resurrected body. Enoch was no more because he was taken. We just cannot say beyond what the text witness tells us.

No, I didn't mean those resurrected at Jesus death had heavenly bodies. I meant those resurrected at 70 AD had heavenly (spiritual) bodies.

As for Elijah, would it surprise you to know that he did not go to heaven that day? He actually lived on, on earth, after Elisha took his mantle.

 

[ralliann]

How then, do you see that event relating to my Post #572?

It is still a resurrection from the dead. Alive again after the grave