Do Preterists believe in the Physical Resurrection of Jesus?

[Erwin]

Someone brought to my attention the fact that preterists do not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus.

I want to clarify this point - do preterists believe that Jesus rose from the dead on the 3rd day - a flesh and blood resurrection?

Also, are we saved by the blood of Jesus?

Thank you.

 

[Hoonbaba]

Hi Erwin,

We all indeed believe Jesus died on the cross in the flesh, and resurrected again on the 3rd day in the flesh. And we are definitely saved by the blood of Jesus, if not, our faith is useless (1 Corinthians 15:14).

However we don't believe Christ's body is limited to the flesh (John 14:19, John 16:16-19, 2 Corinthians 5:16-17, 1 Tim 6:15-16, 1 Tim 1:17)

Also, this link expands on all this.

God bless!

-Jason

 

[NumberOneSon]

YES!!!

I gladly affirm exactly what Hoonbaba stated; ALL Christians that hold the preterist eschatology believe Jesus died on the cross in the flesh, that He resurrected again on the 3rd day in the flesh, and that we are saved by His blood.

Whoever told you differently has misrepresented us and has no idea what we actually believe.

In Christ,

Acts6:5

 

[parousia70]

I must add my comments too Erwin.

Preterism absolutely afirms that Jesus Christ Died in the flesh on the cross, and rose in the flesh on the 3rd day, and Christians are saved by his shed blood.

When speaking of Christian theology in general, Rest assured, If the Bible teaches it, Preterism affirms it.

I'll echo what was already said in that you were grossly misinformend by someone who either dosen't know any better, or wishes to spread untruth about preterism for one reason or another.

If I can be any more clear, let me know.

YBIC
P70

 

[parousia70]

Originally posted by Erwin
Someone brought to my attention the fact that preterists do not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus.

I want to clarify this point - do preterists believe that Jesus rose from the dead on the 3rd day - a flesh and blood resurrection?

Also, are we saved by the blood of Jesus?

Thank you.

Perhaps I'm nitpicking, but you did ask for clarification.
After re reading your post Erwin, I realized you asked If preterists believe in a "flesh and blood" resurrection.

Maybe I'm wrong (wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last) but I am unaware of anything in the Bible that says Jesus' resurrection was "Flesh and Blood"
I believe it was indeed "flesh and Bone", but I believe His blood was shed, and am unaware of any sripture that supports the idea that Blood continued to course through his veins after he rose.

I would welcome the opportunity to be corrected about this.

Also, to clarify what you believe Dr. Loh, may I ask if you believe Jesus rose from the grave in a "Glorified" Body or did it receive glorification sometime after that?

Thanks in Christ,
P70

 

[davo]

Originally posted by Erwin
Someone brought to my attention the fact that preterists do not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus.

I want to clarify this point - do preterists believe that Jesus rose from the dead on the 3rd day - a flesh and blood resurrection?

Also, are we saved by the blood of Jesus?

G'day Erwin

What was represented to you as preterist "fact" -was definitely misrepresented or at least misunderstood and was definitely "fiction" -covenant eschatology affirms the physical resurrection of Christ. His resurrection was not quite as you said however, as in "a flesh and blood resurrection?" Flesh and bone, yes -but blood no:

Luke 24:39 Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have."

Jesus' resurrection was unique as He was the only one ever prophesied or promised not to see physical corruption i.e., decay. Jesus HAD to rise physically from the dead as proof of his claims to "lay down His life AND take it up again."

davo

 

[Bobcat]

Re: Do Preterists believe in the Physical Resurrection of Jesus?

Yes

 

[Pericles]

Originally posted by Erwin
Someone brought to my attention the fact that preterists do not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus.

I want to clarify this point - do preterists believe that Jesus rose from the dead on the 3rd day - a flesh and blood resurrection?

Also, are we saved by the blood of Jesus?

Thank you.

My two cents, YES, every "preterist" that I know believes in the redemptive sacrifice and death on the cross of Messiah, and his physical resurrection.

 

[TheBear]

Originally posted by davo


G'day Erwin

What was represented to you as preterist "fact" -was definitely misrepresented or at least misunderstood and was definitely "fiction" -covenant eschatology affirms the physical resurrection of Christ. His resurrection was not quite as you said however, as in "a flesh and blood resurrection?" Flesh and bone, yes -but blood no:

Luke 24:39 Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have."

Jesus' resurrection was unique as He was the only one ever prophesied or promised not to see physical corruption i.e., decay. Jesus HAD to rise physically from the dead as proof of his claims to "lay down His life AND take it up again."

davo

So, you are saying that since Jesus did not mention eyes, ears, lips, tongue, hair, lungs, etc., that He was merely a tent of skin, draped over His skeleton?

 

[Pericles]

Originally posted by TheBear


So, you are saying that since Jesus did not mention eyes, ears, lips, tongue, hair, lungs, etc., that He was merely a tent of skin, draped over His skeleton?

I can't speak for davo, but since you are asking this, also the question should be asked "Did Jesus for example have the need for ears, and the internal ear mechanism and nerves in order to hear the disciples speaking"?

The same goes for lungs, heart, brain...did he have sexual organs...etc? If so why? What was the need for something like this?

Like davo said, the resurrection of Christ was one of a kind, and the only physical one talked about in the scripture. Jesus is called "firstborn of the dead " and "firstfruits of the resurrection ". What does that mean? If the resurrection is to be physical, then clearly the Bible is wrong, because many others were physically resurrected before Christ was.

Were you nor resurrected when you were saved by Christ's blood? Did you not come from death to life? If so, how much more alive in Christ will you be if your physical body will be immortal?

 

[GW]

Just wanted to post this comprehensive study on the resurrection body of Jesus Christ. The article leaves no stone unturned and gives us a powerful understanding of the NATURE of God and of immortal, heavenly, spiritual bodies such as characterize the immortal state of the saints:

The Resurrection Body of Christ
by Richard L. Nemec
http://www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/topical/resur_body.htm


This article is a "must-read" and is an eye opener for those who haven't put much thought or time into the ascended glorified Jesus Christ.

 

[davo]

Originally posted by TheBear
So, you are saying that since Jesus did not mention eyes, ears, lips, tongue, hair, lungs, etc., that He was merely a tent of skin, draped over His skeleton?

G'day Bear

No, I'm not saying any of those things you've just mentioned. I was simply clarifying Erwin's "flesh and blood" statement -according to what the Bible "actually" says -no more, no less. Again the "fleshly" [I don't mean carnal] mindset is blocking you from seeing what I'm saying. We know that "flesh and blood" cannot enter the Kingdom of God. We also know that through faith in Christ WE ARE in the Kingdom of God. We also know the you and I ARE flesh and blood -bad logic if one gets stuff in your mindset. The answer =the Kingdom of God is supra-natural i.e., ABOVE the natural i.e., spiritual. We are flesh and blood, yet in this life in Christ we DO enter the Kingdom.

davo

 

[TheBear]

Originally posted by davo


G'day Bear

No, I'm not saying any of those things you've just mentioned. I was simply clarifying Erwin's "flesh and blood" statement -according to what the Bible "actually" says -no more, no less. Again the "fleshly" [I don't mean carnal] mindset is blocking you from seeing what I'm saying. We know that "flesh and blood" cannot enter the Kingdom of God. We also know that through faith in Christ WE ARE in the Kingdom of God. We also know the you and I ARE flesh and blood -bad logic if one gets stuff in your mindset. The answer =the Kingdom of God is supra-natural i.e., ABOVE the natural i.e., spiritual. We are flesh and blood, yet in this life in Christ we DO enter the Kingdom.

davo

Not quite following your logic, Davo. First you say, "Flesh and bone, yes -but blood no". So what was it that Jesus showed Thomas? A spirit? Literally flesh and bone? Figurative flesh and bone, meaning the entire physical body, transformed (my choice ), or what?

Then you go on to contradict yourself. First you say:

We know that "flesh and blood" cannot enter the Kingdom of God.

Then you say:

We are flesh and blood, yet in this life in Christ we DO enter the Kingdom.

And please don't patronize me with this "Again the "fleshly" [I don't mean carnal] mindset is blocking you from seeing what I'm saying." tactic. I have been a Christian, studying God's word and doctrines, and have been spiritually growing in Christ for over 27 years now.

John

 

[davo]

John, I apologise for sounding "patronising" -that was the very thing I didn't want to have happen, that's why I bracketed the "I don't mean carnal" -can't win :o

Just to back-track: Jesus physically rose out of death. He was with His apostles on a number of occasions post resurrection and showed by His tangible flesh and bone [as He said -Lk 24:39] body that He was no ghost -eating with them etc.

However, your confusion makes my point. When we view the "Kingdom" only in temporal terms and not taking into account the covenantal aspect of it then "literalistic logic" is confusing.

Those three aspects that you said were contradictory are all scriptural truths:

'We know that "flesh and blood" cannot enter the Kingdom of God' -1Cor 15:50.

'We are flesh and blood,' -Jn 3:4,6. 1Cor 15:39. [and countless others]

'... yet in this life in Christ we DO enter the Kingdom.' -Jn 3:5 etc

They only seem contradictory when seen out of context. If you say that we aren't in the Kingdom NOW because Christ hasn't come, then that contradicts Jesus' injunction about being 'born again' -so entering His Kingdom.

davo

 

[Auntie]

Erwin,

I have seen the name of Kenneth Gentry at some preterist websites, and I think he is a partial preterist. The following is an excerpt from his website. Thank you for allowing me to post this.

"Hyper-preterists (e.g., J. S. Russell's, The Parousia, 1887, rep. 1983, 1997) provide many fine insights into preteristic passages. Unfortunately, they go too far by extending valid observations gathered from temporally-confined judgment passages (texts including such delimitations as "soon" and "at hand") to passages that are not temporally constrained and that actually prophesy the future Second Advent of Christ. This school of preterism tends to focus all eschatological pronouncements on A.D. 70, including the resurrection of the dead, the great judgment, and the second advent of Christ. Consequently, they leave the stream of historic orthodoxy by denying a future return of Christ and are even pressed by system requirements to deny the bodily resurrection of Christ. This view has developed a cult-like following of narrowly focused and combative adherents."


http://kennethgentry.com/Merchant2/backtothefuture.htm

 

[Pericles]

Originally posted by Auntie_Belle_Um
Erwin,

I have seen the name of Kenneth Gentry at some preterist websites, and I think he is a partial preterist. The following is an excerpt from his website. Thank you for allowing me to post this.

"Hyper-preterists (e.g., J. S. Russell's, The Parousia, 1887, rep. 1983, 1997) provide many fine insights into preteristic passages. Unfortunately, they go too far by extending valid observations gathered from temporally-confined judgment passages (texts including such delimitations as "soon" and "at hand&quot to passages that are not temporally constrained and that actually prophesy the future Second Advent of Christ. This school of preterism tends to focus all eschatological pronouncements on A.D. 70, including the resurrection of the dead, the great judgment, and the second advent of Christ. Consequently, they leave the stream of historic orthodoxy by denying a future return of Christ and are even pressed by system requirements to deny the bodily resurrection of Christ. This view has developed a cult-like following of narrowly focused and combative adherents."


http://kennethgentry.com/Merchant2/backtothefuture.htm

Wow...if Gentry says this, IT MUST BE TRUE! We are all doomed!!

I am becoming more and more convinced that not only is this user not interested in an honest and constructive conversation, but he/she is bent on putting a stop to any posts related to fulfilled eschatology on this forum.

Your hatred of your brothers in Christ is mind-blowing...

 

[davo]

Well I don't agree with what he say here, but at least he places intelligible arguments -and having read some of his works he is well worth reading -if you're interested.

davo

 

[Bobcat]

Doesn't most every religious perspective, eschatological or otherwise, developed a strain of cult-like combative adherents? Most cults making news these days are of the extremist future (but near) end times variety. We've got a lot of them running around up here in my part of the country (northern U.S. Rocky Mountains)-and let me tell you, they're plenty combative.

So I'm not surprised to hear the Preterism has it's share of extremists too.

But I've read a lot of Preterist materials and I don't recall any that are outside of mainstream Christianity regarding Christs death and resurrection.

 

[parousia70]

Originally posted by TheBear


Figurative flesh and bone, meaning the entire physical body, transformed (my choice ), or what?

Hi John,
Could you clarify what you mean by "transformed"?

Are you saying Jesus was raised in His "glorified" body?

Thanks

 

[GW]

TO STATE AGAIN FOR THE RECORD:

Preterists are entirely Catholic Orthodox concering the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Period. End of discussion.

Now for those who don't know, HOW AND BY WHAT PROCESS the rest of the saints receive their immortal heavenly bodies is a topic of much debate within mainline denominations of Christianity. There is simply no "orthodoxy" concering this topic.

God bless,
GW