Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
If the spirit already went back to God prior to the ascension of Christ (ecclesiastes 12:7), why are you arguing that the transition of the spirit going to heaven upon death occurred after the ascension of the Christ?
I am answering using scripture. I believe exactly as the scriptures say.
Daniel 7:17-18 These four great beasts are four kings who shall arise out of the earth. But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, forever and ever.’
Matthew 25:34 the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world
I believe exactly as the scriptures say:
Daniel 12:7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the stream; he raised his right hand and his left hand toward heaven and swore by him who lives forever that it would be for a time, times, and half a time, and that when the shattering of the power of the holy people comes to an end all these things would be finished.
Acts 24:15 having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there is about to be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust.
1 thessalonians 4:17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.
Revelation 14:13 And I heard a voice from heaven saying, “Write this: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.” “Blessed indeed,” says the Spirit, “that they may rest from their labors, for their deeds follow them!”
You parousia, and mkgal, are always ducking around these plain issues. When do you apply these Scripture to? Is it AD70, the intra-Advent period or a climactic literal singular day in the future when Christ comes to take all mankind from time into eternity, from corruption into incorruption?
If you are going to ignore the questions I ask, then I will ignore yours. I'm not interested in having a one sided inquiry.
I know what you believe, I am just trying to get you to be open, honest and straight with everyone else.
This is what you said previously:
"Acts 24:15 ~ ....... having a hope in God, which they themselves also await, that there is about to be a resurrection, both of the just and of the unjust.
First of all, this was written around 61-62 AD (from what I've read) - the "unjust" I believe this is in reference to were those of ancient Israel that joined in believing the statement that "we have no other god but Caesar" (I say it that way, because that's how I see ancient Israel as divided at that time - either those that were believing Jesus and His disciples....or those that chose to believe the apostate ancient Jewish religious leaders of that time). That would mean they were "spiritually dead" under the Old Covenant Law with no way to salvation. The New Covenant brought these people LIFE - but it was a gradual process of the Old covenant dying....and the NEW covenant being brought to full LIFE. That is a form of resurrection. The "salvation" wasn't complete (for all) until 70 AD (which, I realize, is another mental hurdle you have to overcome - because I'm presuming you believe salvation was "complete" at the Cross).
I guess another way of expressing this would be to say that during the "resurrection" of 70 AD.....all joined to the OLD covenant died - and what was brought forth in LIFE were all those joined to Christ and the New Covenant.
It will seem like a "theological mess" when you're trying to make sense of it while holding to another paradigm (that's the trouble with bias - it causes us to not "see" anything else laid before us). I realize this - that's where I sat for years......decades. That's why I'm "absolutely obsessive" over the significance of 70 AD....because it reminds me of those pictures we had ages ago.....where a hidden picture was within a picture of thousands of dots and once you SEE it you can't believe you missed it for so long.
Or like this optical illusion (the old lady and the young lady):
Other optical illusions: 14 optical illusions that will definitely melt your brain"
I don't think you do, as you continually conflate my partial preterist belief with full preterism. I am not a full preterist, nor do I wish to discuss full preterism, especially in the eschatological forums, if you wish to discuss why full preterism is indeed incorrect, which I fully agree with you on, then you can either pm me or begin a discussion in the controversial forums, where full preterism discussion is allowed.
1.) I believe the scriptures of the NT that refer to Jesus' 2nd coming refer to the coming of Jesus in judgment upon Israel in 66-70ad. I do not believe this precludes a future coming of Christ as the nicene creed states.
2.) I believe the transition of the dead in Christ going to heaven occurred sometime around 70ad. I do not believe this precludes a future resurrection of believers as the nicene creed states.
It appears that you believe the transition of believers going to heaven instead of hades upon death occurred at the cross, because Jesus' spirit went to the Father upon death and Stephens spirit went to the Father upon death (acts 7:59, luke 23:46).
However, several scriptures contradict your belief:
1.) according to Ecclesiastes 12:7, the spirit already went back to the Father upon death, way before the cross. Thus the cross was not the transition period.
2.) Jesus literally stated he had not yet ascended to the Father after His resurrection (John 20:17). Thus, if Jesus ascended prior to the resurrection, in any form, it would contradict the very words of Jesus.
3.) Peter states Jesus was not abandoned to hades, but was resurrected (acts 2:31). Thus Jesus was in hades prior to the resurrection.
I didn't say this, this was mkgal:
When did the Old Covenant truly "disappear" and end?
I don't think you do, as you continually conflate my partial preterist belief with full preterism. I am not a full preterist, nor do I wish to discuss full preterism, especially in the eschatological forums, if you wish to discuss why full preterism is indeed incorrect, which I fully agree with you on, then you can either pm me or begin a discussion in the controversial forums, where full preterism discussion is allowed.
1.) I believe the scriptures of the NT that refer to Jesus' 2nd coming refer to the coming of Jesus in judgment upon Israel in 66-70ad. I do not believe this precludes a future coming of Christ as the nicene creed states.
2.) I believe the transition of the dead in Christ going to heaven occurred sometime around 70ad. I do not believe this precludes a future resurrection of believers as the nicene creed states.
It appears that you believe the transition of believers going to heaven instead of hades upon death occurred at the cross, because Jesus' spirit went to the Father upon death and Stephens spirit went to the Father upon death (acts 7:59, luke 23:46).
However, several scriptures contradict your belief:
1.) according to Ecclesiastes 12:7, the spirit already went back to the Father upon death, way before the cross. Thus the cross was not the transition period.
2.) Jesus literally stated he had not yet ascended to the Father after His resurrection (John 20:17). Thus, if Jesus ascended prior to the resurrection, in any form, it would contradict the very words of Jesus.
3.) Peter states Jesus was not abandoned to hades, but was resurrected (acts 2:31). Thus Jesus was in hades prior to the resurrection.
I didn't say this, this was mkgal:
When did the Old Covenant truly "disappear" and end?
What has been notable for months is that you make ambiguous statements but refuse to support it with actual Scriptures.
That is all you want to talk about. When you talk about "a future coming of Christ" or "a future resurrection of believers" there is a notable silence. No Scripture! Nada! You have nothing to bring to the table! You are just evasive and uncomfortable.
Where are your Scriptures re this future event (if you indeed believe it is going to happen)?
That is like saying, "I believe President Trump will be the next President of the USA, but that does not preclude Micky Mouse from being it."
Ok, maybe this:
"I typically hold the resurrection of the just and unjust to have occurred around the time of the destruction of the Jerusalem. For in Daniel 12, we see that when the power of the holy people is shattered then would be completed the events of Daniel 12 which included the resurrection of the just and unjust.
this correlates nicely with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple occurring in the 1st century (this generation)and Paul’s statement that The resurrection of the just and unjust was “about to” occur (acts 24:15).
I view the 1st resurrection as being born again and the 2nd resurrection as going from natural body to spiritual body (1 Corinthians 15:44).
I typically don’t hold that the resurrection for believers is the Exact same as Christ’s. Christ’s flesh was prophesied to not see decay (acts 2:27). However believers were never given that same promise. I know plenty of believers whose flesh has decayed. Thus we go from natural body to spiritual body (1 Corinthians 15:44)
while dispensationalists typically hold to a rapture first, then resurrection of the dead (which is the exact opposite of scripture), I hold to the resurrection of the dead then After that, those who are in Christ are caught to be forever with the Lord, as stated in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17. In other words, I hold that the resurrection of the just and unjust occurred around 66-70ad, and from that point on believers, who remain alive and physically die in the Lord are raised in a spiritual body and caught up to heaven. Thus this consummates the Ezekiel temple which is where Gods throne is and his footstool is (Ezekiel 43:6-7) where he forever dwells with his people."
What's ambiguous?
1.) I believe the majority of "2nd coming" statements in the NT refer to Jesus coming in judgment upon Israel in 66-70ad. I have provided multiple scriptures for this belief, so your statement is false.
2.) While most Amil's believe the transition of the dead going to heaven instead of hades took place around 30-33ad, I believe it took place around 70ad. I have provided multiple scriptures for this belief, so your statement is false.
For some reason you continue to deflect the question I asked about in regards to the transition of the dead in christ going from hades to heaven. Let's see if you respond to this in the next post, or continue to deflect.
Because we are typically talking past each other. The verses I believe that are about the coming judgment of Christ on Jerusalem, you believe to be about the end of the world.
None of my arguments have been about a future end of the physical universe, but about the end of the old covenant age. So why would I bring up verses that have nothing to do with my argument?
I believe this is future to us.
1 thessalonians 4:17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.
I believe this is future to us.
2 corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.
I believe this is future to us.
revelation 1:7 Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen.
I believe this is future to us.
revelation 20:15 And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
I believe this is future to us.
Hebrews 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment
This doesn't make any sense. Although Your argument would make sense if I stated the coming judgment of Jesus in Israel doesn't preclude the coming of Mickey mouse in the future.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?