here is scripture stating it plainly.
Romans 8:10-11
But if Christ is in you, although your bodies are dead because of sin, your spirits are alive because of righteousness. If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your
MORTAL BODIES also through his Spirit which dwells in you.
there are 2 "redemptions" one is spiritual, one is physical. we achieve spiritual redemption from sin because of the cross.
first the spiritual redemption
Ephesians 1:7
In him we
HAVE redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace
Colossians 1:14
in whom we
HAVE redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
just as scripture says, this is a redemption they already had pre 70AD.
the redemption we do not yet have is the redemption of the body.
Romans 8:23
and not only the creation, but we ourselves,
who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait for adoption as sons,
the redemption of our BODIES.
there are some things that need to be noted.
in Romans 8:10 the resurrection of Christ is mentioned, we know his Body was gone from the tomb, that is well documented in the Gospels. Romans 8:10-11 right after mentioning the resurrection of Christ it says life will be givin our "mortal bodies
ALSO" Romans 6:7 says "
For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.]
if our resurrection is like Christ's it will be bodily, since his spirit obviously did not die. Romans 8:10(and a plethora of other scripture) also tells us our spirits are alive because of his dwelling in us.
the preterists defense of this is a legalistic argument, saying the change in law did not occur until 70ad, and that until that time the church was under mosaic law evidenced by Paul observing mosaic law...this is also terribly incorrect.
first off Paul after becoming a believer, did not consider himself "under law" and spent alot of time saying so. romans 7:1-10 shows this and gives an example of this law He was "not under" was none other than one of the 10 commandments.
Romans 7:1,4-10
Do you not know, brethren--for I am speaking to those who know the law--
that the law is binding on a person only during his life?
Likewise, my brethren,
you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God. While we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death.
But NOW we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit. What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet, if it had not been for the law, I should not have known sin.
I should not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet." But sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, wrought in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the law sin lies dead.
I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died; the very commandment which promised life proved to be death to me.
Paul also did not keep mosaic law because of a requirement to do so, he in fact gives his reasons why, and his own words show the preterist supposition that his keeping mosaic custom is evidence of his being under law is incorrect.
1 Corinthians 9:20
To the Jews I became AS a Jew,
in order to win Jews; to those under the law I became as one under the law--though not being myself under the law--that I might win those under the law.
the next question is when did the preisthood change? when was the new covenant ratified?
this was pre 70ad as well, and the writer of Hebrews confirmes this:
Luke 22:20
And likewise the cup after supper, saying,
"This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood".
Hebrews 9:15-18
"Therefore he
IS the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance,
since a death has occurred which redeems them from the transgressions under the first covenant. For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive. Hence even the first covenant was not ratified without blood.
i have a question for preterists, are you in your immortal glorified body yet? if not, then has your victory over death been achieved? or is it still a promise you await the fulfilling of, just as any pre 70 ad believer?
another mistake preterists make is they have the priest in the order of Melchiz'edek behaving in the manner of a preist in the order of Aaron. Yeshua is not bound by mosaic law concerning his priestly office, he is not an Aaronic priest.
Hebrews 7:12
For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well.
the writer of Hebrews also has yeshua performing his Priesthood pre 70ad, which would mean the change in law was pre 70ad as well. the first act of this was the sacrifice of blood at the cross.
Hebrews 9:12-15
he entered once for all into the Holy Place, taking not the blood of goats and calves but his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the sprinkling of defiled persons with the blood of goats and bulls and with the ashes of a heifer sanctifies for the purification of the flesh,
how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God , purify your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
Therefore he IS the mediator of a new covenant , so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance,
since a death has occurred which redeems them from the transgressions under the first covenant.
so we see plainly scripture shows christ as priest at the cross, securing the new covenant enacted in 30ad, not 70ad.
preterist are desparate to avoid the physial nature of the resurrection, simply because the bones in the tombs are phsical evidence they are wrong. this is why they try to use a legalistic argument to sidestep the phyical nature of the resurrection.
oh and hello GW
