The Next Reformation? 9.5 Thesis Posted on 'Church Door'!

The Prophecy Reformation Institute ^ | 2001 | John Noe

[vmatt]

The Church goes on "from generation to generation, forever, world without end amen!"(Eph 3:21)

Ephesians 3:21 Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.

[NATE4"ONE NATION"]

Can you please cite when/where Jesus literally fulfilled this prophecy in the past?

Just read any old Jewish writer. They used "the whole earth", "the world", "all nations" to describe or exagerate the greatness or importance of something.
Josephus is perfect for this. He used it to describe the knowledge of "all men" as to the greatness of the Jewish temple. What about the Vikings? What about the Africans? Did ALL nations and ALL men know of the greatness of the temple and come from around the whole world to see it?

The most frustrating thing about the futurist view is a lack of understanding the use of symbols and language in the Bible. They just DON'T CARE!
If it fits their fantasy view, ignore context and language usage.

"CLOUDS". I ask you to be a "Beroe'a" in this and do a bible word search for yourself.
God Literally came in the clouds many times in judgment ("clouds are His chariot") or in deliverance ("cloud by day", "cloud decended upon the temple").

I believe Christ came in "like manner" (Acts 1) (hint, hint) in a real cloud. The Shikinah glory. Josephus also declared seeing this. I will post His writtings on the "wars in the heavens" that he saw if you really need me to.

[NATE4"ONE NATION"]

While dispensationalist eschatology is certainly novel (not to be confused with historic premillenialism), hyper-preterism is heretical; it is not an eschatology within the pale of historic Christian faith, Reformed or otherwise. Indeed, dispensationalism, with all of its manifest errors, does not commit the serious errors of hyper ("full") preterism.

Heretic:
A man made word of which Luther was a part of. He was a heretic.
In your view I am one because I dispute "traditional church teaching."
Funny, I do not dispute GOD's WORD!!

Keep your "heretic."

There is a name for this heresy--Hymenaeanism.



My Response to Jim West's Article "The Allurement of Hymenaen Preterism: A Dispensable Eschatology"

It is not "conservative" as it attempts to overthrow the historic view of the Christian faith that, while much, perhaps most, of what Jesus foretold was indeed intended for His immediate audience, not *all* things were fulfilled in His time nor were they meant to be (i.e., the bodily Resurrection of the just and unjust; the final judgement; the bodily return of Jesus Christ at the close of history, etc.).

Not "Christian faith, but their faith in a future second coming. It has duped many to faithlessness. Lies do that you know.

You dispute and again call Christ a LIAR (Luke 21:22, Daniel 12). All 3 events are linked and to be accomplished at the same time according to Daniel and Christ.

"Full" (or "hyper") preterism denies the following: the future physical Advent of Christ; the future final judgment; and the future physical, bodily resurrection of the just and unjust.

YES!! We reject it is future. But we agree it was a real event.

This places it outside of Christian orthodoxy and within the pale of heresy--it is sub-christian belief.

No. It is a reformed view and a Christian one.

As Andrew Sandlin observed, while theological progress and reformation is good, not all doctrinal "development" is progress, "This theological progress and creativity must occur within the strictures of orthodox Christianity, however, or it subverts the Faith." http://www.chalcedon.edu/articles/article_hy_Hymenaen.html Advocating beliefs that are against the core doctrines of the historic Christian faith is not "Reformation," and, indeed, goes against everything the great Reformers stood for valiantly.

To bad you stick up for "core" THEOLOGY in rejection of scriptural proof and context of Christs own words (Luke 21:22).

Regarding the "recommended" works, of the writers I am familiar with, *none* of them advocate the heretical Hymenaeanism. Ken Gentry has publically spoken against it. The post in question cites Kenneth Gentry in support of hyper or full preterism, which is simply not reflective of the facts. Indeed, Gentry has written, "No Creed allows any second Advent in A.D. 70." He adds, "No Creed allows any other type of resurrection than a bodily one. Historic creeds speak of the universal, personal judgement of all men, not a representative judgement in A.D. 70. It would be most remarkable if the entire church that came through A.D 70 missed the proper understanding of the eschaton and did not realize its members had been resurrected!" (See Kenneth Gentry, "A Brief Theological Analysis of Hyper-Preterism," *Chalcedon Report* no. 384 [July 1997]: p. 23). In short, Gentry (rightly) considers it outside of the historic Christian faith.

Too bad he will have to face judgment on calling someone who disagrees a non-christian. I am glad he knows the hearts of all men.
His view must be like Catholicism, holding infallible authority?

R.C. Sproul in his excellent work, The Last Days According to Jesus, cites, "'We need to state it clearly for the record that R.C. Sproul, Sr. is not a full preterist, but he does see a lot of merit in the partial preterist approach similar to Ken Gentry.' It is comforting to be quoted accurately." (See R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus Baker Books, 1998, p. 158, quoting and responding to Edward E. Stevens, in Stevens' Response to Gentry Bradford, PA: Kingdom, 1997). The unqualified citing of DeMar, Gentry, Sproul, et.. al., as supportive of heretical hyper, or full, preterism is a dishonest use of sources, to say the least.

Only the signitaries on the article pledged their "support." Gentry's debate with Ice in "great Tribulation: Past or Future" led me to full-preterism.
He was the most right, but he was very inconsistant and had no good reason for calling Christs words (Luke 21:22) LIES!

While these men certainly eschew the novel view of dispensationalism and do hold to a historic post-millenial, partial-preterist view and historic orthodoxy, they do not in any sense advocate the "full" preterism and heresy of the post in question. They hold to Biblical Reformation--not heresy.

I almost feel like praying the imprecatory Psalms!

You "authoritative" preachers are so filled with pride, all the while feeling your knowledge is superior to Christ's Himself. You deny Daniel 12's easily laid out sequence and it's time frame of 3 1/2 years. You say Christ lied then when He declared the "time of vengeance (Matt 23) to fulfill "ALL that is written"!!!
So are you a heretic in Christ's eyes?
Maybe not, but prideful enough to be one!

[NATE4"ONE NATION"]

I have much more but I need feedback to know where to go with this next.

I believe I witnessed a healing once.
I also grew up around "tongues" and "interpretation" all of it proving false, lame and un biblical.

I cannot judge your heart or experience, but I am VERY cautious of any 1 Cor 13 "failing" or "passing away" gifts.

[antidisestablishment]

8:21 specifically states that God is suspending his judgement as long as the earth endures (8:22). The span of earth's endurance is not addressed.

Denying the final judgement (Rev 20) is to deny Christ's sacrifice. Is this where you stand?

[NATE4"ONE NATION"]

You make it say something it does not.

You cannot conditionalize a promise based on a following summary of descriptions.

Genesis 8:21 And when the LORD smelled the pleasing odor, the LORD said in his heart,
PROMISE!!
"I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done.
DESCRIPTION!
22 While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease."

Rev 20 is past. It was judgment on the nation of Israel, not the destruction of all flesh.
He said He would not do that again.

[antidisestablishment]

The destruction of the Temple in AD 70 cannot satisfy all of Rev 20 unless you completely twist it beyond words. You are so far outside the realm of orthodoxy, that there is no reasoning with you.

You have done much for the ecumenical movement--like reminding us of the differences between disagreement and outright heresy.

[vmatt]

I cannot judge your heart or experience, but I am VERY cautious of any 1 Cor 13 "failing" or "passing away" gifts.

You can and must judge to be fair. I have experienced biblical powers which are absolutely real and authentic. Herein is something to chew on: I know without the slightest doubt that I could instruct anyone willing how to "pray the father" and receive spiritual blessings from the Holy Spirit, poured out two thousand years ago. And this is my witness: If one such as I could be so blessed, almost anyone certainly can also. What I am talking about is by no means an end all, but it is a necessary foundation stone on which one must build. NATE, get this, Satan is the only one standing in anyone's way and can duplicate this gift!;)

Acts 19:2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

[NATE4"ONE NATION"]

Did you read 134 and 147?
I am glad I am not the only "heretic" out there.

I asked for the gift of tongues. I did not get it. I did try to mimic it. That was what I was taught to do.
Then I read about how it was to be used. The I read that it was a gift for a "time." Not necessarily carrying into all ages.

I have not seen 1, in my 25 years around Pentacostals, proper use of the "gift."
You would honestly be the first if it is true. All others are into "name it claim it", "loud prayers with no interpretation", prophesies that lie, unanswered or staged healings, etc.

I have witnessed one healing. To the best of my knowledge, it was real. But healing is not a seasonal gift.

What biblical basis for tongues continuation do you have?

[woollyone]

Of course you are certainly welcome to your personal methods of interpretation, but I respectfully take a different understanding than the conclusions which you hold to. As is probably obvious, based upon my earlier question to you.

You said; "The most frustrating thing about the futurist view is a lack of understanding the use of symbols and language in the Bible. They just DON'T CARE! If it fits their fantasy view, ignore context and language usage."

The exact same accusations that you make against the futurists can be made toward the preterists. It is however interesting that you feel the need to throw out attacks against opposing perspectives and those holding them, rather than merely defending you position. Careful! We are all His sheep and though we may disagree in prophetic interpretation, your statement that 'They just DON'T CARE!'" is reckless, unfounded, unloving, arrogant and uncalled for in the body of Christ.

You further stated; "I believe Christ came in 'like manner' (Acts 1) (hint, hint) in a real cloud. The Shikinah glory"

First, regardless of what you may believe, this belief of yours is not substantaited by the Acts 2 account of this appearing of the Holy Sprit. The text tells us that this was the person of the Holy Sprit which came upon them, not the person of Jesus Chrsist, ressurrected and glorified. Also, we know this was not Jesus, because in John's gospel (chapters 14 & 16), Jesus tells us that He must go away so that another may come...that "another" is the Holy Spirit and is NOT the person of Jesus Christ.
Also, There is no mention of Shikinah Glory, nor is there mention of a cloud in the Acts 2 account. Your beliefs in this matter are in contrast to the clear reading of the text.

Also, the testimony of Peter at the time declared that this is the Holy Spirit that descended that day, when Peter replied to the crowd; "For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is [but] the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh" (Acts 2:15-17) Your beliefs on this matter are, again, in contradiction with the Word.

What about in a real resurrected body!?! Your explaination is not in "like manner" at all. It is a different manner completely. If it were "like manner", the resurrected body of Jesus would have been seen. Instead, what was seen was a rushing wind and tounges of fire. No mention of clouds, or the Shikinah Glory of God anywhere in the text; these suppostions are from your mind alone and are not found in the text. Again, this appearing in Acts 2 of the Holy Spirit is in a different manner completely from the manner accounted for in Acts 1:9-11.

"Josephus also declared seeing this..."
But Jospehus never saw Jesus!...and if he did, it would ahve to be a return in "like manner" as was prophesied. Unfortuantley, Josephus is known for his hyberbolic and self-aggrandizing descriptions, is not considered to be a writer inspired by the Holy Spirit, and his writings are not considerd as canonical by any school of theology that I am aware of. So we can discredit his testimony in this matter as unreliable and certainly not meritous of establishing the preterist perspective of the second coming of Chrsit in the flesh during the first century.

The allegorical interpretation of Scripture leaves the liberal interpreter to change all the doctrines of Scripture at his convenience so as to support personal agendas. For instance, if "1000 years" (which is often repeated in Revelation) could mean anything, according to the liberal interpreter, so then can "two of each kind of animal", "three days and nights", or "six days", or "on the seventh day" mean anything also. Where does the allegory stop, except at the personal convenience of the liberal interpreter? Allegorical interpretation is dangerous business and at best is no more that deductive analysis rather than inductive analysis and permits bringing a personal agenda into the text rather than allowing the test to speak for itself.

Too often, it is this liberal method of interpretation that is employed by cults. Not saying here that you are a cultist, just making a note of the fact.

peace.

[woollyone]

This is almost becoming laughable...
Let's go back for a second...I quoted Mat. 24:30 in post #133 " ...and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." (Mat. 24:30)

And to this quote, you replied...
"They used "the whole earth", "the world", "all nations" to describe or exagerate the greatness or importance of something."

So...are you trying to say that Jesus meant something other than what He clearly said?...namely that "all tribes of men" really should be better translated (according to you) as "a self-exageration by Jesus, of His greatness or importance, and of His own return in glory and reign upon the earth"?

Please! Stop the ride...I want off!

According to your interpratation, what does "That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven, and [things] in earth, and [things] under the earth; And [that] every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father."(Phil.2:10) really mean?

If we apply your interpretation methods, as you've laid them out for us, we would come to understand that...well...you see...it doesn't reeeeally mean every knee...it..well..means that Jesus is just REEEAAAALLLLYY important!

You see the problem with the allegorical method of interpretation. In Phillipians 2:10, you cetainly must agree that "everyone" clearly means "everyone" , but in Matthew 24:30, "everyone", to you, just means...well...it'll be REALLY important. You are forced to jump through these hoops in order to remain in your preterist interpretation, but fail to apply your interpretation methods evenly and equally to all references in Scripture and when you do, you end up preverting the clear teaching of the Word.

So when Jesus the Christ says "everyone" he didn't mean what He said, but when Paul, the chief among sinners says "everyone", he means exactly what he says? That would be rather odd dontchathink?

Like I said earlier....the liberal allegorical methods of interpretation are dangerous....and now I'll add that they are contradictory to their own employment and to the clear teaching of Scripture.

[CCWoody]

I have not seen 1, in my 25 years around Pentacostals, proper use of the "gift."

What is the proper use of the Gift of Tongues?

[vmatt]

I asked for the gift of tongues. I did not get it. I did try to mimic it. That was what I was taught to do. Then I read about how it was to be used.

This just fascinates me, never before had I heard someone admit these things. Your honesty is humbling and I'm glad you had those experiences.

What biblical basis for tongues continuation do you have?

My guess is that you know them as well as I. I'll get to them but let me relate something of my experience that I have found to be somewhat rare. I received my first experience in 1976 alone in my apartment and it changed my life totally. I consider this when I received the gift of the Holy Ghost, precisely what I was begging God for, and spoke in tongues for the first and only time. This was one of several experiences over the coming years that have been a source of great joy. Since then I have learned much and have seen how this gift, if allowed, will work. Like I always say, there is a lot of unlearning we all must do and Satan is against us at every step. Fasting is one of Satan's worst enemies.

[NATE4"ONE NATION"]

We are all His sheep and though we may disagree in prophetic interpretation, your statement that 'They just DON'T CARE!'" is reckless, unfounded, unloving, arrogant and uncalled for in the body of Christ.

I apologize. I should have said most shrug language usage off.

The text tells us that this was the person of the Holy Sprit which came upon them, not the person of Jesus Chrsist, ressurrected and glorified. Also, we know this was not Jesus, because in John's gospel (chapters 14 & 16), Jesus tells us that He must go away so that another may come...that "another" is the Holy Spirit and is NOT the person of Jesus Christ.

I agree. I was hinting that "like manner" is not "exact manner."
I believe the shikinah glory is what decended upon Jerusalem in AD 70 according to Josephus account.

If it were "like manner", the resurrected body of Jesus would have been seen.

Again, I was not refering to the Holy Ghost at all!
I am talking of the Jewish wars, in which there was a war "in the clouds (heavens)". That was the shikinah glory cloud. "Coming in the clouds", will return in "like manner" (in the clouds) = Shikinah Glory.

Unfortuantley, Josephus is known for his hyberbolic and self-aggrandizing descriptions, is not considered to be a writer inspired by the Holy Spirit, and his writings are not considerd as canonical by any school of theology that I am aware of. So we can discredit his testimony in this matter as unreliable and certainly not meritous of establishing the preterist perspective of the second coming of Chrsit in the flesh during the first century.

Yes, and Ben Franklin was a myth, Columbus didn't really discover America, the Constitution is not worth anything. They were not canonized or inspired!

That is an irresponsible way to treat history because it threatens your viewpoint.
Josephus' accounts were very similar to old testament prophecy fulfillments of old testament prophecies.

There wouldn't be any "inspired writtings" during or after 70 AD anyway because that is when that gift and "authority" of the apostles ended. No matter what we will be without canon or inspired text after these events. So they should all be discredited!

Allegorical interpretation is dangerous business and at best is no more that deductive analysis rather than inductive analysis and permits bringing a personal agenda into the text rather than allowing the test to speak for itself.

Well, in Paul or John's absence from us to explain it, allegory is the only consistant interpretation.
Stars fell in the Old Testament, God came in "the clouds" in the old testament, the harlot, the beast, the dragon.

It seems we all have symbols for our interpretation. 1000 years is consistant with other descriptive "1000" uses in the bible.

Again, you are not giving proper credit to the prior uses of these language descriptions.

[NATE4"ONE NATION"]

So...are you trying to say that Jesus meant something other than what He clearly said?...namely that "all tribes of men" really should be better translated (according to you) as "a self-exageration by Jesus, of His greatness or importance, and of His own return in glory and reign upon the earth"?

NO, no, no!!

Josephus used "the whole earth" to exagerate how revered the temple is.
"All men" did not know of the temple, but all civilized society had heard of it. That does not mean that Mr. Peasant in the alley in Rome knew of it.

In the style of the language used, Christ is referring to the "whole earth" or "all people" being aware of the Destruction of the "holy people". Their "shattering"(daniel 12) at the hands of the Jews, would be well know.

Obviously you will ignore this common use of that term in Jewish language also. I cannot help that.

John 5:24 - Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

I guess it is NOT appointed unto all men once to die, then the judgment. I guess the great white throne was not for all.

Every statement uttered is done in context of the whole of scripture.

We do not live in the times of old.
OUR time has this as it's judgment. Those who are wicked go from death to judgment. Those who are saved go strait to life.
Christ took our judgment upon Himself.

[NATE4"ONE NATION"]

What is the proper use of the Gift of Tongues?

According to scripture. Followed by interpretation, an actual language spoken, interpretation COMES TO PASS!

Any interpretation including "Jesus is coming soon" is of the devil (that persons flesh!)

[NATE4"ONE NATION"]

Fasting is one of Satan's worst enemies

You're telling me!! Eating is my #1 weakness and consentration during prayer is my #2!!

The flesh is a monster!

[CCWoody]

Are you ruling out prayer in tongues or just answering the question as narrowly asked? Just curious as you seem to believe that Healing is still possible, but maybe not tongues.

[vmatt]

Esther 4:15 Then Esther bade them return Mordecai this answer,

16 Go, gather together all the Jews that are present in Shushan, and fast ye for me, and neither eat nor drink three days, night or day: I also and my maidens will fast likewise; and so will I go in unto the king, which is not according to the law: and if I perish, I perish.

Esther 5 1 Now it came to pass on the third day, that Esther put on her royal apparel, and stood in the inner court of the king's house, over against the king's house: and the king sat upon his royal throne in the royal house, over against the gate of the house.

2 And it was so, when the king saw Esther the queen standing in the court, that she obtained favour in his sight: and the king held out to Esther the golden sceptre that was in his hand. So Esther drew near, and touched the top of the sceptre.

3 Then said the king unto her, What wilt thou, queen Esther? and what is thy request? it shall be even given thee to the half of the kingdom.

[woollyone]

"I guess the great white throne was not for all."

You are correct. The great White Throne will be only for the perishing...

"And I saw a great white throne...
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works(only the perishing trust in their works for salvation).
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." (Rev. 20:11-15)

The Great White throne judgement is the judgement of the dead, not the redeemed. Nowhere in this passage are the redeemed even mentioned. We are not there, because we have escaped death into life, by the blood of the Lamb. There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

The redeemed will face a different judgement, called the Bema Seat Judgement, where the quality of our works, whether done in the energy of the flesh, or in the work of the Spirit will be put into the refining fire and rewarded for those things which were of gold, silver, and precious gems. Those works of the flesh shall be burnt up as though they were of wood hay and stubble. (1Cor. 3:8-15)

But back to the original question though...

You have said that Jesus fulfilled the Acts 1:9-11 prophecy during the first century...

"...while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight...this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven".(Mat. 24:30)

Yet, every conservative commentary that I have read about this event interprets this to mean that Jesus will return bodily to the earth in the same manner in which He bodily departed. You however, have focused only upon clouds and some reference to Josephus and have not addressed that the manner in which Jesus departed and will return is in His resurrected and glorified body.

In the spirit of the Bereans, I have taken your advice...
After a careful study of the term "in like manner" (on tropon), it is easy to see that it is referring to "[in] a manner, way, fashion, as, even as, like as". This term is specifically used to represent "an exact manner" as it is also used in Mat. 23:37; Luk. 13:34; Acts 7:28, 15:11, 27:25; Jud 1:7.

So, I ask you again, when did Jesus ever return in bodily form to rightly fulfill the prophecy of Acts 1:9-11.

Just to note...Joesphus wrote of things he didn't actually see first-hand concerning the Messiah, he only relates second and third-hand testimony and certainly has a reputation of exaggeration in his relating of history, so as to paint himself as more important that he actually was. His reputation, though good for general insight to the on-goings of the times is not as a reliable witness for submitting evidence upon which a jury could clearly decide crucial facts. As a witness, he would certainly be dismissed as not reliable in most courts, as historians have trouble with many of his accounts. His testimony doesn't even address the bodly return of Christ, but merely tells of clouds, and neither have you addressed this important subject, but have also merely discussed the appearance of clouds and the possibility that they might hint at the Shikinah glory in 70 AD, but mention nothing of Jesus' bodily return, as He said He would do.

I put so much emphasis on His bodily return, because the original language supports it, Jesus himself proclaimed it, and the apolstles taught it.

Also, if the bodily return of Jesus was to be so important, where is the eyewitness testimony? Certainly, if this had happened, as you say it did, during the first century, we'd have some specific reference to it! You say that when Jesus said of His own return...

"then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." (Mat. 24:30)

...that He merely implied that it would be important, but that in your opinion, not all the tribes of the earth would indeed see the event, as Jesus clearly stated, and, again, according to your interpretation, we should only understand this as to mean a really important event and not a really visible event. If it is, as you say, merely an important event and not a really visible and important event, shouldn't we have some eyewitnesses to the alleged event? I mean the Creator of the Universe, the Word Incarnate, the Son of God is going to return again in His resurrected flesh, shouldn't we have at least one thousand or so witnesses available with clear testimony, for it should have been as obvious as "lightning flashing from East to West" After all, this seems like a pretty HUGE event to me and to all other believers!

Where is the real evidence for His real bodily return?

Jesus warned that there would come false christs and false sightings of His return, when He cautioned...

"Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here [is] Christ, or there; believe [it] not...Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, [he is] in the secret chambers; believe [it] not. For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together." (Mat. 24:23,26-28)

His coming is described with a warning about those who would claim falsly that He had come in secret...in a small way, but Jesus Himself said that His bodily return will in fact be so pronounced as to be obvious to all available to witness it. Lightning from East to West is pretty visible and the vulture is a sure sign of a carcass nearby. He said that it would be so obvious that it will be unmistakable.

Where is the eveidence for this "unmistakeable" bodily return?

The truth is, there is no evidence, because He hasn't yet returned yet.

peace