Amillenialism and the nation of Israel

[mister rogers]

I appreciate your honest approach in being versed on all the different perspectives! I find that refreshing.

I also appreciate your wording of the OP.

I tend to look at peterism differently, but I totally grasp your use of it. Well explained!

I may just know enough to get me in trouble though. ; )

 

[mister rogers]

I have recently taken the more amillenial view (I prefer the term postmillenial, however that has a different meaning to many these days). But I still have difficulty believing the return of the Jews to their historic land this past century has no prophetic significance. Thoughts?

Gonna refocus a little. Perhaps the amill/postmill views can still be consistent with the view that the recent return of the nation of Israel is a part of the unfolding of Ezekiel 36-37, and that this is in line with what Paul was talking about in Romans 11:25-32? That the Jews as a nation being reestablished could be part of God's plan to bring them (as a whole eventually in the future) to saving faith in Christ (grafted into true spiritual Israel) before His return? I'm mostly interested in what amill and postmill might say (positive or negative). Seen some good feedback so far. Any other takers?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

mister rogers said: ↑
I have recently taken the more amillenial view (I prefer the term postmillenial, however that has a different meaning to many these days). But I still have difficulty believing the return of the Jews to their historic land this past century has no prophetic significance. Thoughts?

Gonna refocus a little. Perhaps the amill/postmill views can still be consistent with the view that the recent return of the nation of Israel is a part of the unfolding of Ezekiel 36-37, and that this is in line with what Paul was talking about in Romans 11:25-32? That the Jews as a nation being reestablished could be part of God's plan to bring them (as a whole eventually in the future) to saving faith in Christ (grafted into true spiritual Israel) before His return? I'm mostly interested in what amill and postmill might say (positive or negative). Seen some good feedback so far. Any other takers?

I would say the Amill view is just above Partial Preterism and just below Full Preterism.

Difference between amillennialism & preterism

Could someone please tell me the differences between amillennialism and preterism (partial vs full as well)?
I've tried googling and found several websites, but truth be told, I got so lost in it that I quit still not really knowing any answers.
Thanks in advance.
Just dumb it down royally, please.

Amillennialism - Wikipedia

Amillennialism (Greek: a- "no" + millennialism), in Christian eschatology, involves the rejection of the belief that Jesus will have a literal, thousand-year-long, physical reign on the earth. This rejection contrasts with premillennial and some postmillennial interpretations of chapter 20 of the Book of Revelation. For the most Christians this question was solved by the Council of Ephesus.

The amillennial view regards the "thousand years" mentioned in Revelation 20 as a symbolic number, not as a literal description; amillennialists hold that the millennium has already begun and is identical with the current church age. Amillennialism holds that while Christ's reign during the millennium is spiritual in nature, at the end of the church age, Christ will return in final judgment and establish a permanent reign in the new heaven and new earth.

Many proponents dislike the name "amillennialism" because it emphasizes their differences with premillennialism rather than their beliefs about the millennium. "Amillennial" was actually coined in a pejorative way by those who hold premillennial views. Some proponents also prefer alternate terms such as nunc-millennialism (that is, now-millennialism) or realized millennialism, although these other names have achieved only limited acceptance and usage.[1]
====================================
Early church

Few early Christians wrote about this aspect of eschatology during the first century of Christianity, but most of the available writings from the period reflect a millenarianist perspective (sometimes referred to as chiliasm). Bishop Papias of Hierapolis (A.D. 70–155) speaks in favor of a pre-millennial position in volume three of his five volume work and Aristion[when?] and the elder John echoed his sentiments, as did other first-hand disciples and secondary followers.[3] Though most writings of the time tend to favor a millennial perspective, the amillennial position may have also been present in this early period, as suggested in the Epistle of Barnabas, and it would become the ascendant view during the next two centuries.[4][5][6][7][8][9] Church fathers of the third century who rejected the millennium included Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 – c. 215), Origen (184/185 – 253/254), and Cyprian (c. 200 – 258). Justin Martyr (died 165), who had chiliastic tendencies in his theology,[10] mentions differing views in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, chapter 80:

"I and many others are of this opinion [premillennialism], and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise."[11]

Certain amillennialists such as Albertus Pieters understand Pseudo-Barnabas to be amillennial. In the 2nd century, the Alogi (those who rejected all of John's writings) were amillennial, as was Caius in the first quarter of the 3rd century.[12] With the influence of Neo-Platonism and dualism, Clement of Alexandria and Origen denied premillennialism.[13] Likewise, Dionysius of Alexandria (died 264) argued that Revelation was not written by John and could not be interpreted literally; he was amillennial.[14]

Origen's idealizing tendency to consider only the spiritual as real (which was fundamental to his entire system) led him to combat the "rude"[15] or "crude"[16] Chiliasm of a physical and sensual beyond.

Premillennialism appeared in the available writings of the early church, but it was evident that both views existed side by side. The premillennial beliefs of the early church fathers, however, are quite different from the dominant form of modern-day premillennialism, namely dispensational premillennialism.[17]

 

[Grip Docility]

Gonna refocus a little. Perhaps the amill/postmill views can still be consistent with the view that the recent return of the nation of Israel is a part of the unfolding of Ezekiel 36-37, and that this is in line with what Paul was talking about in Romans 11:25-32? That the Jews as a nation being reestablished could be part of God's plan to bring them (as a whole eventually in the future) to saving faith in Christ (grafted into true spiritual Israel) before His return? I'm mostly interested in what amill and postmill might say (positive or negative). Seen some good feedback so far. Any other takers?

I’ll even throw you a bone from my perspective, with a bit of personal compromise on my part, to compliment your careful investigation...

Paul, in Galatians 4, makes it clear he is speaking figuratively... (Galatians 4:24) and he proceeds to illustrate the two covenants, which are clearly two promises. The first covenant is bound to earth (Galatians 4:25), while the second is bound to the third Heaven (Galatians 4:26).

In this, Paul speaks about earthly Israel (as Jerusalem is her true Capitol), and Heavenly Jerusalem (as Jerusalem is her Capitol).

Supersession isn’t required to resolve this, but wisdom that there is earthly Israel, enslaved and Heavenly Israel, free.

On earth, we are not part of Earthly Israel as the BOC, but upon carnal death, we go to Heavenly Israel, where the BOC and Israel are unified in Jesus.

The final work of God on earth, IMO, will be to unify Heavenly Israel with Earthly Israel... and I indeed believe this will cause a final number of the earth that are resurrected to come from all over the nations, but especially that will start with National Israel of old, that has rejected Jesus, weeping to receive their Messiah and realize Jesus really is the presence/glory of the Great I Am.

One last alter call from God, who, desires that none should be lost, but all come to repentance.

The final number that rise up against Jesus and all people who stand with Him, will play out the final battle of battles, that will be on a supernatural scale, as Jesus will be literally with us, again.

We know the Anti-Christ will come before this, thus the devil is still attempting to squash out National Israel... (he has no claim on Heavenly Israel as he was cast out after the first Coming of our Lord and Savior).

Blessings to you, prayers of Love that you continue to hold the hope for the lost that come from He Who is the origin of Hope and all wonderful wishes to you for studying scripture in a way that challenges all current hearsay’s about theology to study more deeply.

- Grip

Why is this a compromise on my part? Because by heavenly thinking, by being foreigners here on earth and holding residence with Jesus in our hearts, the BOC could then be Israel (in timeless Heaven) as well, though I retain that we never Superseded Israel (here on earth, we are not part of Israel), but we’re merely grafted in, upon leaving our bodies and entering Heaven.

In this way, we see how the kingdom of Christ is not of this earth, and as a new heaven and earth will come with peace, his kingdom will never fully be “of this earth”... emphasis on “THIS” Earth.

 

[parousia70]

Huh? I implied Jesus hasn’t come back yet.

We know that's what you believe

I also recognize Christ brought about great things His first Corporeal time here.

So do I

What’s the issue?

The issue is you claimed Matthew 21:40-45, namely "the coming of the Lord of the Vineyard to destroy the 1st century wicked servants, Chiefs Priests and Pharisees, to avenge the Death of Jesus" was already fulfilled by Jesus. You stated that YOU BELIEVE We are not still waiting for that event to come to pass.

I am asking you WHEN and HOW that took place?

So far you have no answer.

Now, would you like to offer an answer on when and how that took place? If you believe and assert it is fulfilled, you should be able to point to when and how, correct? or, would you like to amend your assertion to say that this event of the "Coming of the Lord of the Vineyard to destroy them, and lease His vineyard to others" has in fact NOT happened yet?

Which is it?
Past or Future?

You seem to not be so sure of your own position on that passage now.

2 Peter 2 clears up the idea that Jesus has to return immediately.

One verse in Peter must not be interpreted in such a way as to negate 100+ other scripture verses.

It also warns of scoffers that say He won’t return.

Straw Man.
Nobody here is saying the return of Christ is not a real thing.

People that fixated on the generation shall not pass verse as specifically bound to Christ’s return missed that Peter explained Jesus is allowing time to pass that many will come to Him.

2 things there... The everlasting Gospel has no expiration date.
That's why its called everlasting.

Next, People fixated on Peter's quote of the Psalmist (day is a thousand years) missed the over 100 NT passages that Cement a return of Christ in judgment to First-century peoples.

I'v already listed two of them for you to exegete... we are still waiting for you to do that.

Also, the end comes to prevent all humanity from destroying itself. That’s an actual verse.

Please, when quoting an actual verse, give the chapter and verse so we may examine it and test your interpretation.

 

[parousia70]

Even pre-mill can have elements of partial preterism. Big question: What do we see as already having been fulfilled, and what not yet? In some sense, every Christian is partial preterist

Correct.
ALL Christians are Preterist.
We only vary by degree.

 

[parousia70]

Matthew 24's Olivet discourse where Jesus says "this generation shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled" and Revelation 1's "to show to his servants things which must soon take place" is just a tip of the iceberg of why some hold certain preterist views.

Here's over 100 more

 

[parousia70]

Gonna refocus a little. Perhaps the amill/postmill views can still be consistent with the view that the recent return of the nation of Israel is a part of the unfolding of Ezekiel 36-37, and that this is in line with what Paul was talking about in Romans 11:25-32? That the Jews as a nation being reestablished could be part of God's plan to bring them (as a whole eventually in the future) to saving faith in Christ (grafted into true spiritual Israel) before His return? I'm mostly interested in what amill and postmill might say (positive or negative). Seen some good feedback so far. Any other takers?

Again, The fact that those people have no verifiable relationship, genetically, politically or religiously to the pre desolation Hebrew Nation/Theocracy prevents me from buying into the idea that modern Israel is any sort of re-establishment of anything or anyone Biblical.

It surprises me how quickly so many people must disregard or willingly ignore this fact in order to prop up their speculative claims.

Modern Jews are no more Biblical Israel than you or I, and In fact, I'd argue you and I are verifiably more "Biblical Israel" than they are.

 

[Grip Docility]

We know that's what you believe


So do I



The issue is you claimed Matthew 21:40-45, namely "the coming of the Lord of the Vineyard to destroy the 1st century wicked servants, Chiefs Priests and Pharisees, to avenge the Death of Jesus" was already fulfilled by Jesus. You stated that YOU BELIEVE We are not still waiting for that event to come to pass.

I am asking you WHEN and HOW that took place?

So far you have no answer.

Now, would you like to offer an answer on when and how that took place? If you believe and assert it is fulfilled, you should be able to point to when and how, correct? or, would you like to amend your assertion to say that this event of the "Coming of the Lord of the Vineyard to destroy them, and lease His vineyard to others" has in fact NOT happened yet?

Which is it?
Past or Future?

You seem to not be so sure of your own position on that passage now.



One verse in Peter must not be interpreted in such a way as to negate 100+ other scripture verses.



Straw Man.
Nobody here is saying the return of Christ is not a real thing.



2 things there... The everlasting Gospel has no expiration date.
That's why its called everlasting.

Next, People fixated on Peter's quote of the Psalmist (day is a thousand years) missed the over 100 NT passages that Cement a return of Christ in judgment to First-century peoples.

I'v already listed two of them for you to exegete... we are still waiting for you to do that.



Please, when quoting an actual verse, give the chapter and verse so we may examine it and test your interpretation.

If you don’t know 2 Peter 2 well enough to recognize it, I would have been concerned.

Jerusalem was under siege. Jesus predicted consequences for killing Him. Those consequences were not His coming, but the real live removal of Israel for over 2000 years. Only now is it back.

Sorry, but Justin Martyr called it wrong.

To say Israel isn’t real is absolutely absurd.

It’s back! It is under the same trials it was before... simply to exist. It lines up with prophecy, dead bang!

Now, God isn’t involved in the goings on of earth? Did He fail at keeping it wiped out? As you would imply by calling National Israel of today fake, which I’m sure you would? How does Israel exist if God never willed it to exist again and why does it throw a monkey wrench in your logic by existing so, when it literally shows prophecy coming to fruition?

Take heed... never has God physically wared in person, via literal War, on this earth, but Zechariah 14 and Joel 3 and Joel 4 (If you’re reading out of a Tanakh) have much to say. You can Spiritualize the daylights out of it, but a wine press will get trod.

Spoiler alert, those that are against Christ and those of National Israel that will respond to His return, will become main courses at a big “feast”.

We are the guests... but the Bridegroom hasn’t joined with His bride of old, yet. The BOC is simultaneously guest and also bone of His bone as Paul and Jesus are recorded as pointing out in Exegesis.

As for your use of “straw man”... your “use of straw man” is a “straw man”.

 

[parousia70]

Jerusalem was under siege. Jesus predicted consequences for killing Him. Those consequences were not His coming

Jesus Disagrees with you:

40 When the lord of the vineyard comes, what will he do unto those husbandmen? 41 They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.

You say this was fulfilled in The Seige of Jerusalem

Jesus calls that event "The Coming of the Lord of the Vineyard... The Chief Cornerstone... to miserably destroy those wicked men... and grind them to dust".

Jesus is, plainly, the Lord of the Vineyard & Chief Cornerstone, and He, in fact, did come and do the very things He said he would come and do to them in this passage.

You agree these things were indeed accomplished in the Seige of Jerusalem. Jesus says He was the one who would come and do them.

Your Job is to bring your view in line with Jesus' proclamation and make no attempt to ignore it, wish it away or otherwise pretend it does not exist in scripture.

 

[claninja]

I’ll ask you outright...

Has the 2nd coming of Jesus happened yet?

As a partial preterist, I believe the parousia (presence of Christ) occurred in 70 AD near the destruction of the temple at the end of the age. As Jesus stated "this generation will not pass away until all these things haven taken place".

Matthew 24:34 Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened.

Are you claiming to know the day and the hour He “came”?

Nope, definitely don't know the day or hour his parousia occurred near the destruction of the temple prior to the end of the age. All we know is that immediately after the destruction of the temple and the great tribulation of the Jewish people, the parousia would occur.

Matthew 24:29-31 Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

First, be aware of this: Scoffers will come in the last days to scoff, living according to their own desires, saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? Ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they have been since the beginning of creation.” They willfully ignore this: Long ago the heavens and the earth were brought about from water and through water by the word of God. Through these waters the world of that time perished when it was flooded. But by the same word, the present heavens and earth are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. Dear friends, don’t let this one thing escape you: With the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance. But the Day of the Lord will come like a thief; on that day the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, the elements will burn and be dissolved, and the earth and the works on it will be disclosed. Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, it is clear what sort of people you should be in holy conduct and godliness as you wait for and earnestly desire the coming of the day of God. The heavens will be on fire and be dissolved because of it, and the elements will melt with the heat. But based on His promise, we wait for the new heavens and a new earth, where righteousness will dwell.

2 Peter 3:10-13
But the Day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and its works will be laid bare. Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to conduct yourselves in holiness and godliness as you anticipate and hasten the coming of the day of God, when the heavens will be destroyed by fire and the elements will melt in the heat. But in keeping with God’s promise, we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.

Since we can't see into heaven, not really sure what the destruction of that looks like. However, it's important to know what the greek word for elements means:


stoixeíon– properly, fundamentals, like with the basic components of a philosophy, structure, etc.; (figuratively) "first principles," like the basic fundamentals of Christianity.

[4747 (stoixeíon) refers to "the rudiments with which mankind . . . were indoctrinated (before the time of Christ), i.e. the elements of religious training or the ceremonial precepts common alike to the worship of Jews and of Gentiles" (J. Thayer).

The RSV however renders stoixeia as "elemental spirits," i.e. spiritual powers or "cosmic spirits" (DNTT, 2, 828). This views 4747 /stoixeíon ("elements") as ancient astral beings associated with the very beginning (make-up) of the earth

 

[Grip Docility]

Jesus Disagrees with you:

40 When the lord of the vineyard comes, what will he do unto those husbandmen? 41 They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.

You say this was fulfilled in The Seige of Jerusalem

Jesus calls that event "The Coming of the Lord of the Vineyard... The Chief Cornerstone... to miserably destroy those wicked men... and grind them to dust".

Jesus is, plainly, the Lord of the Vineyard & Chief Cornerstone, and He, in fact, did come and do the very things He said he would come and do to them in this passage.

You agree these things were indeed accomplished in the Seige of Jerusalem. Jesus says He was the one who would come and do them.

Your Job is to bring your view in line with Jesus' proclamation and make no attempt to ignore it, wish it away or otherwise pretend it does not exist in scripture.

So... you’re taking a parable that has everything to do with the consequences of killing the SON... which is in full context in the Parable, which then goes on to discuss retribution by the FATHER, and you’re saying that’s the Second Coming of THE SON?

The ONLY MAN/GOD that has SEEN the Father is The Son, because to SEE the Father, you have to SEE the Son, yet only the Son can SEE His own MIND/SPIRIT (The Father)...

The Second Coming is Corporeal... not Spiritual. The destruction of Israel for a time was not done by Corporeal YHWH, nor was it Prophesied in Zechariah 14 to be so. Unless you’re willing to argue that Ancient Rome was God incarnate, you have a mega theological issue to resolve. If you actually argue this, I will then ask you why God incarnate of the Ancient Rome argument of your design had sin within His flesh... which God never does, would or will... sooooo... nope.

Get yo facts straight!

Obviously to see Jesus is to have Seen the Father, but when the Son is Seen in Context of the Second Coming, it’s in PHYSICAL Corporeal Form...

I don’t think you like that I acknowledge Israel was removed for a time, but is back now.

Your Job is tooooo?????? Oh my!

Well, have fun with Acts 1 that is PAINFULLY clear the Second Coming will be YeHoShua in PHYSICAL CORPOREAL form.

You can do what ya want with Acts 1.

I’ve still managed to clearly explain my perspective. You... you won’t.

Because you claim you can spiritualize any passage you desire... you will turn every passage that proofs your posit incorrect with smoke, mirrors and Eisogesus.

Don’t worry, my full preterist sibling in Him. I still know we will meet in Heaven and Praise Jesus.

All blessings to you.

Acts 1... oops... this same Jesus... oops... exactly as He left.... oops.... Mount of Olives.... Sabbaths day journey... Oops... Zechariah 14... oops... Joel 3

Did Israel get defended as ALL nations had laid siege to her? Nope. So her reemergence is right in keeping with scripture. What was that about being in line with scripture? What was my “job” again? 2 Timothy 3:16 now has you at a loss for words per Acts 1.

Don’t worry, you can Spiritually Bob Ross it. Hey, maybe Luke, the suspected author of Acts was a spiritual metaphors and you can say it’s all figurative words... good idea?

 

[Grip Docility]

As a partial preterist, I believe the parousia (presence of Christ) occurred in 70 AD near the destruction of the temple at the end of the age. As Jesus stated "this generation will not pass away until all these things haven taken place".

Matthew 24:34 Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened.



Nope, definitely don't know the day or hour his parousia occurred near the destruction of the temple prior to the end of the age. All we know is that immediately after the destruction of the temple and the great tribulation of the Jewish people, the parousia would occur.

Matthew 24:29-31 Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.



2 Peter 3:10-13
But the Day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and its works will be laid bare. Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to conduct yourselves in holiness and godliness as you anticipate and hasten the coming of the day of God, when the heavens will be destroyed by fire and the elements will melt in the heat. But in keeping with God’s promise, we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.

Since we can't see into heaven, not really sure what the destruction of that looks like. However, it's important to know what the greek word for elements means:


stoixeíon– properly, fundamentals, like with the basic components of a philosophy, structure, etc.; (figuratively) "first principles," like the basic fundamentals of Christianity.

[4747 (stoixeíon) refers to "the rudiments with which mankind . . . were indoctrinated (before the time of Christ), i.e. the elements of religious training or the ceremonial precepts common alike to the worship of Jews and of Gentiles" (J. Thayer).

The RSV however renders stoixeia as "elemental spirits," i.e. spiritual powers or "cosmic spirits" (DNTT, 2, 828). This views 4747 /stoixeíon ("elements") as ancient astral beings associated with the very beginning (make-up) of the earth

You have a kind demeanor about your replies. I can calmly say we’re going to agree to disagree on this.

Yet, all unity in our Savior, my sibling in Him.

 

[parousia70]

To say Israel isn’t real is absolutely absurd.
It’s back! It is under the same trials it was before... simply to exist. It lines up with prophecy, dead bang!

Except for one pesky detail... the people there are no more related to the pre desolation Hebrews than you and I are.

 

[claninja]

You have a kind demeanor about your replies. I

As does everyone on these forums.

I can calmly say we’re going to agree to disagree on this.

You disagree with Jesus stating “this generation would not pass away unti these things take place?”

You disagree with the parousia occurring after the tribulation?

You disagree with Greek word elements having the definition of rudimentary principles?

Just trying to understand what you disagree with

Yet, all unity in our Savior, my sibling in Him.

Amen to that. We may disagree on certain eschatological standpoints but we find unity in the body of Christ through the salvation of Jesus

 

[Grip Docility]

As does everyone on these forums.



You disagree with Jesus stating “this generation would not pass away unti these things take place?”

You disagree with the parousia occurring after the tribulation?

You disagree with Greek word elements having the definition of rudimentary principles?

Just trying to understand what you disagree with



Amen to that. We may disagree on certain eschatological standpoints but we find unity in the body of Christ through the salvation of Jesus

You have the internet, right? You can research this for yourself, right?

What you have said has been far disproven so deeply, it’s a fallacious as when Richard Dawkins questioned if Jesus was even a real person.

Sincerely, from the findings of the Bible to University field experts, you are dramatically mislead to come to that conclusion.

 

[Grip Docility]

As does everyone on these forums.



You disagree with Jesus stating “this generation would not pass away unti these things take place?”

You disagree with the parousia occurring after the tribulation?

You disagree with Greek word elements having the definition of rudimentary principles?

Just trying to understand what you disagree with



Amen to that. We may disagree on certain eschatological standpoints but we find unity in the body of Christ through the salvation of Jesus

I believe Jesus was speaking of the removal of Jerusalem from the Jews in full context.

Per Acts 1, Jesus’ Second Coming will be in Corporeal form.

That’s just my opinion. <3

 

[parousia70]

So... you’re taking a parable that has everything to do with the consequences of killing the SON... which is in full context in the Parable, which then goes on to discuss retribution by the FATHER, and you’re saying that’s the Second Coming of THE SON?

Are you denying the Father and the Son are ONE?

Are you Denying Jesus is the Chief Cornerstone?

42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:

‘The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone.
This was the Lord’s doing,
And it is marvelous in our eyes’?

43 “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. 44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.”

You can wish these scriptures away all you want... pretend they don't mean what they say and invent a different, spiritualized meaning to suit your theology... It won't change them on the page, nor will it convince those of us who take them LITERALLY not to, however.

Don’t worry, my full preterist sibling in Him.

I'm not full preterist.

 

[Grip Docility]

Are you denying the Father and the Son are ONE?

Are you Denying Jesus is the Chief Cornerstone?

42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:

‘The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone.
This was the Lord’s doing,
And it is marvelous in our eyes’?

43 “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. 44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.”



I'm not full preterist.

Okay... you have Spiritualized the Second Coming... how is this not capping off all of Prophecy?

Again, I specified Israel was temporarily put in time out. That is the context of the verse you gave. It was gone and now it is being Nationally restored. Else, God messed up in letting it be restored and I don’t think God makes mistakes. You?

As for God being Deuteronomy 6:4 ... you obviously didn’t take the time to read what I wrote. I was very clear. I am infact, enormously insistent in defining my perspective as TriUnitarian, since strict TriUnitarian Creed believers commit semi-Arianism by over dividing the Une aspect of God.

Just Incase you doubt what I’m saying... I’ll post this from another thread where I responded in agreement about God... being ONE../ UNE....

Spoiler

If you read John 20:28, you'll find an apostle of Jesus, kneeling before Him, and calling Him GOD.
And you'll note that Jesus didnt correct Him.
Jesus also said .."i go to Your Father, and mine"...
Jesus is God, and i agree that there is a Trinity.

Grip Docility->
Agree!!! Without a doubt!

The Cloud by Day and Pillar of Fire by Night (Exodus 13:21-22) is specifically identified as Jesus by Paul. (1 Corinthians 10:1-4)

This accompanying “Presence” of God also met face to face with Moses in the tent of meeting and Israel worshiped the Presence... (Exodus 33:7-11)

Why is this important in the (Hebrews 1:3) of the matter and the (Philippians 2:9) Fact?

That Presence we see is identified as “The I Am”... “The Tetragrammaton”, “The Highest known name that identifies the Father.”... “The YHWH, JHVH, YHVH, JHWH” of the matter... and... Romans 10 binds the Greek for YHWH (Romans 10:13) <- {the usage of LORD there is the Greek for YHWH - Romans 10:13 Lexicon: for "WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED."— as the usage of Kuriou is so explicitly intended in the manuscripts to read YHWH that even the watchtower NWT renders it Jehovah -https://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/nwt/books/romans/10— ... which always makes me laugh diabolically, because right in an Arian translation, Calling on Jesus is calling on the name of Jehovah... } to Jesus (Romans 10:9).

One more time without the additions... Romans 10 binds the Name Jesus to the Name of YHWH.

Without a doubt, there is the Trinity. But without a doubt, as YHWH spoke in Isaiah (Isaiah 43:11) which goes very nicely with (Luke 2:11)... and sheds further “LIGHT” on (Isaiah 9:6), there’s no biblical reason to Limit how deeply we can safely ascribe Theos to Jesus Christ.

Without fear or reserve, we can proclaim that Jesus/Yeshua/YeHoShua is God.

Nice tries... No cigar for you.

 

[claninja]

You have the internet, right? You can research this for yourself, right?

What does this have to do with you disagreeing?

What you have said has been far disproven so deeply, it’s a fallacious as when Richard Dawkins questioned if Jesus was even a real person.

A subjective statement. The same could be said about your beliefs. Let’s stick to objective arguments.

Sincerely, from the findings of the Bible to University field experts, you are dramatically mislead to come to that conclusion.

Is that the “demeanor” you were talking about?

I believe Jesus was speaking of the removal of Jerusalem from the Jews in full context.

This doesn’t address with what you disagree about.

You disagree with Jesus stating “this generation would not pass away unti these things take place?”

You disagree with the parousia occurring after the tribulation?

You disagree with Greek word elements having the definition of rudimentary principles?