Not all the Olivet discourse has been fulfilled. In Matthew 24, Jesus talks about his return being like the days of Noah. That means that the fallen angels are going to return to mate with women like they did in Genesis 6. It says in Revelation that Michael will kick Satan and his angels down before Jesus returns. So, not all scripture has been fulfilled yet.
Now, some of Matthew 24 may have been about 70 A.D. because it was addressed to the Jews, but some was in the distant future.
We sure all learning and growing aren't we? It takes humility for a person to change ones views. Someone else who is a "partial preterist" and a dear friend of mine is Steve Gregg. You may find his lectures interesting. They are all free on his website the narrow path dot com (all that's run together in the URL of course). He is also the author of Revelation four views: a parallel commentary.
Once the Lord helps us overcome a false doctrine, the scales begin to be removed from our eyes. All the "overcommeth"ing of Rev chapters 2 and 3 isn't about overcoming Satan, except as he is the author of false doctrine.
Sadly, eschatology in the 20th century church, was limited to preterism and futurism, with the church blind to the traditional continuous-historic context with the exception of a few cults.
"Armageddon" is not about a future battle! It is about Jesus crucifixion. "Wormwood" is not a meteor but actually describes the eventual destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. Why? because Jeremiah mentions the same word during and before the babylonians destroyed the 1st temple - Jeremiah 23:15,Lamentations 3:15,Lamentations 3:19 and even Amos 5:7! Please read through my blog to understand my comments.
@MrsRosengard By individual resurrection, I mean the redemption of each soul's self-same body from corruption under the curse. I just started reading Ladd's "Blessed Hope" today, where in the introduction he describes the redemption of individuals and also society.
I just learned about preterist. I am starting to think that some of rev was already fulfilled but I am unsure about why we are still here. Why is the earth still full of sin? Apparently God hasnt not destroyed all sin yet, which I think is his plan. It's so confusing.
amzing that i have come from the other extreme of dispensationalism. I am no longer a dispensationalist. And we have come to the same conclusions, it seems. In fact, i just recently heard the word "preterism" and what it means; and i've been saved 25 yrs! and i do study a lot. But have avoided eschatology for a long time because it's a tough thing to figure out and so much debating that has led to NOWHERE. I, also believe in a rapture but not a 7 year trib.
I WOULD CONSIDER MY SELF A FULL PRETERIST AND I ALSO BELIEVE THAT ALL WILL STAND BEFORE GOD IN JUDGMENT. MAYBE I JUST DONT KNOW PRETERISM WELL ENOUGH BUT I CANT BELIEVE PRETERIST DONT BELIEVE THAT THEY WILL STAND BEFORE GOD IN JUDGMENT WHEN THEY DIE. IF THIS IS WHATS MAKES YOU SAY YOUVE CHANGED YOUR POSITION THEN I GUESS IM WITH YOU.
Israel is anti christ to they passed an anti missionary law in israel 1977thats more in line with scripture since they wanna third temple to resume sacrafices..killed christ and stilll teach their own from the talmud he is a sorcerrer.the zionist infultrated the "church"for strategic purposes a long timeago.they wanna resume sacrafices in this temple.can you get more anti christ than that.dont believe me?you have a computer at your finger tips go ask a rabbiWAKE UP CHRISTIANS PRETERIST OR NOT!
I meant no insult. Sorry if you thought I did. I have addressed your points, mooglecharmed. :) And I have read all those verses many times. Take care!
Mfblume, you're seriously an arrogant person. Accusing me of going outside the bible simply because you disagree with me makes you an awful teacher and I do not respect you. I could just as easily underhandedly insult you by saying that your comprehension of terms is comparable to that of a little kid's. I've proven you wrong time and time again and I even provided some verses and you called them "wrong." (cont.)
Now, concerning Romans 6, its obviously in the past... BUT IT ALSO SPEAKS OF THE FUTURE! Paul spoke in BOTH future AND present tenses in 1Cor 15 as well! This is really not even a debate at this point since you are so mixed up in how to even make your points.
"And spiritual bodies are like that of Christ's with which he came from the tomb."
And YOU wanna call me "extrabiblical"? Spiritual bodies are alive in our bodies now and will match the ones that Daniel and those alseep got.
Calm down. Let's not involve emotions in this. Rom 6 is about every believer's PAST death with Christ that occurred at initial salvation. And that is not the physical death noted in 1 Cor 15. Spiritual bodies are mortal bodies CHANGED and ALTERED into immortal bodies. It is spiritual versus natural, not non-physical versus physical. The same adjectives are used in the same epistle in chapter 2. And they are not speaking of composite material. No one got any new bodies in AD70.
Calm down? You're the one accusing me of lying and instead of apologize you tell me to calm down. Yeah, Christ would be proud. Moving along, Romans 6 is about a believers past death... for the third time, that is NOT my point. The point is that the BODY IS DEAD! You cannot call Romans 8:10 wrong any longer, mfblume2, I won't allow this. Now then, 1Cor 15 ALSO speaks of the past "individual resurrections" but it also speaks of one which would consummate the faith and occur any moment.
I never accused anyone, let alone you, of lying here. You are just incorrect in your interpretations. So again, please calm down. Do not be so defensive. I never said Rom 8:10 is wrong either. Just your interpretation of it. You clearly are not being reasonable due to your emotions and mistakening not just the bible, but now also my words to be offensive. . Thanks for the chat. Again, take care.
Romasn 6 speaks of a resurrection that is spiritual that follows after spiritual death with Christ. Paul did not say he had not yet experienced this resurrection as you demand. He spoke in the sense of sequence, saying that after spiritual death with Christ shall occur spiritual resurrection. That is why Rom 6:13 speaks of resurrection in Paul's present, not future, tense, ALIVE FROM THE DEAD.
You're mixed up again. Paul said in 6:5 that this had taken place but is related to a MUCH larger scale resurrection that was coming at any moment. Resurrection they eagerly awaited in Rom 8:18-24 EVEN THOUGH they had already come to life by dying to sin and the law.
I meant no insult. Just stating that full preterism's interpretations of resurrection passages requires thoughts not stated plainly in the bible. The verses are not wrong. Your interpretation is wrong. Anyway, you are showing your fruits now.
You didn't mean it as an insult? Could have fooled me since you just say it baselessly and avoid the points I make. Yes, they are plainly stated in the bible. I have plainly stated them over and over again. Daniel would receive this inheritance of resurrection while those still physically alive would be transformed by the official glory of Jesus in his kingdom that came unobserved. Dan 12, 1Thess 4, Rev 1, Luke 20:21, Heb 2:8. I double-dare you to read the passages.
Bibletouchstone and I have conversed a lot of preterism, and I am partial preterist. My youtube site has several videos about the contrast between full and partial. Check 'em out!
I am just coming into full preterism, havinf learned alot from revelation and deduction. I don't understand why you do not consider yourself a full preterist....
I'm a Full Preterist, but I admit, I kinda hope the whole futurist view is correct and I'm wrong. I would love to see some rapture of some type, like so many I've have heard. I would love for it to be a pretrib, but to me, scripture is clear, it's post. I've heard for years by pastors of a secret rapture, which I reject today, but I would love to be a part of what they believe, and meeting them in the air. I just don't see it. I hope I'm wrong, but will always be FullPreterist I think, peace
1 Thess 4 just cannot be interpreted any other way than a physical resurrection, since anything else requires teachings never clearly stated in scripture anywhere!
Yes, it can be interpreted in another way, mfblume2. The "rapture" is not a physical resurrection, it when the Temple fell and Jerusalem was judged that proved Jesus a true prophet of God, the Son of God and the Judge of all men. It was when the saints officially partook of God's heavenly kingdom and judging the fallen, physical kingdom. The Temple was where God dwelt and with no Temple then what sign did the Jews have for God being with them? But Jesus is our sign.
This is what I meant. A person has to contrive all these thoughts the bible never plainly states to see no physical resurrection here. 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15 plainly teach physical resurrection. The Bible is not hidden with mystical meanings not plainly presented as I believe your thought requires.
That's simply untrue, mfblume2. 1Cor 15 is about the spiritual resurrection and nothing else. In fact it calls the spiritual body the seed for the spiritual body (42-44). Then it goes on to say that "flesh and blood CANNOT inherit the kingdom." So explain to me now what I contrived because that's a fancy way of saying I'm deliberately LYING and I've just proven in that I'm not.
The physical body is a seed that CHANGES into a spiritual body, as a seed changes to a stalk. A seed is not left in the ground for a different body not derived from it to exist. As Jesus physically arose in a supernatural spiritual body, so shall we. Hence, He is firstfruits. First of many identicals to follow. That is the plain reading of 1 Cor 15.
No, the physical body has to die in order to become spiritually alive. Do you even read the bible? lol. It only CHANGED the Corinthians and their contemporaries who witnessed the kingdom come and the Temple crumble under Romans. But those who were in literal graves "asleep" received their spiritual body just like Daniel was promised to. (Dan 12:1-4, Rev 12:10, 5:10)
1 Cor 15 is about the BODY. The reason our BODIES shall be changed is because flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom. Hence, the FLESH needs to be changed. A spiritual body is not a non-physical body. It is not physical verses non-physical, but spiritual versus natural.
No, the flesh needs to DIE, not change. Paul is already talking about them being dead in every single one of his letters! (Rom 8:10, 6:5-7, etc.) He constantly says that they are already dead and that their spirit is what lives. The resurrection promised to Daniel in Dan 12 has to do with those who were ALREADY dead being raised to life - Daniel included - when the kingdom came and the Temple desolated. Did they get physical bodies back? No. They came to life, however. Its spiritual. :)
Wrong, all shall be changed but not all shall die. The death in those references you make is speaking about spiritual death, and spiritual death with Christ through His death. Paul spoke in the future tense in 1 Cor 15, whereas he spoke in past tense in Romans 6. And spiritual bodies are like that of Christ's with which he came from the tomb. Phil 3:21 says our bodies shall experience the same thing. Again, you require extrabiblical thought to say your beliefs.
Its funny because you are making my points for me, mfblume2. When the "resurrection" came that you call "the rapture" it was when the people who were "asleep" (Daniel, and those before him, for example) would receive their promise and those who still never "fell asleep" would be transformed somehow, "unobserved", as the kingdom of Jesus was officially and visibly favored by God.
No resurrection occurred in AD70. 1 Cor 15 so plainly teaches that physical bodies shall be changed. All shall be changed, but not all shall die. Paul explicitly said this. And this is speaking of saints alone. :) There are two resurrections. The first is spiritual and is salvation (Rom 6:11, 13). Rev 20:5. Jesus spoke of salvation as a resurrection in John 5:24-25. He then spoke of physical resurrection from the graves in John 5:28-29. Daniel 12 spoke of salvation as a resurrection.
"Daniel 12 spoke of salvation as a resurrection." No, he was told of both. He was told that when the Temple came down it would be by the will of God in order to usher in God's kingdom. He was also told that he would be rewarded after that time. Just so happens that resurrection is the ultimate reward for saints. Go figure. I mean what are the odds... hmm.
I've had those thoughts myself, MrEternal. However, to advocate against FP, I think, is to leave many serious time-sensitive fulfillments incomplete when the prophets said they would be. For example, the "resurrection" that Daniel is promised in Dan 12:13 (the whole ch. really) to take place when Heb 1:1-2, 9:26 say they do. This "resurrection" would come with the awaited kingdom of heaven. You can't have one without the other. Just like the kingdom coming, the resurrection was unobserved.
you said I've had those thoughts myself, MrEternal. However, to advocate against FP, I think, is to leave many serious time-sensitive fulfillments incomplete when the prophets said they would be.
I agree 100%, thats why I'm Full Preterist. In fact for me, not being a Full Preterist would make "ME" feel like I'm calling prophets and Christ a liar, GOD FORBID.
Now reading what the prophets, Christ and every other writer wrote in the scriptures, to me, is all 1st century.
I scribe to the Preterist view. I think it is more accurate, according to the Bible, than is the Futurist view, which I gave credence to for years.
I do not believe that the Resurrection is physical. I believe that the RESURRECTION is CHRIST and CHRIST is the RESURRECTION! It takes place as an INNER BODY and an OUT-OF-BODY experience.
Now I don't care if the book of Revelation says after the Second Coming Christ splits the earth into 3. Then I see on the news the earth is still one. I will still agree with the scripture saying it is split in 3. Many well say well look, that hasn't been fulfilled. No to you it hasn't been fulfilled, to me it means something THAT I DONT UNDERSTAND AS A MAN, not that, well it never happened yet. Like you said and I agree, will always be a Full Preterist. As far as partial preterist
as far as partial preterist, I learned not to even bother. It's pretty hard to change someone. Yes all things are possible threw the Lord, I'll comment before anyway says that, but it's not easy. I find it more irritating then anything. I believe in a high percent how someone is raised, its what they believe threw out thier life mostly. I was raised futurist, and became Full preterist around 20, and no looking back, peace
I was a Pre-millenialist before I came to Christ at 20. In fact it was fear of "the apocalypse" and anticipation of "the rapture" that I was saved in the first place. I became Partial Preterist about 4 years later. Within the last year I made the switch to FP but not based on any FP arguments; it was actually due to me combining history and prophecy with PP and a better sense of Messianic Kingdom background from men like NT Wright in NTPG and J&VG.
The reason I mention that I sort of discovered FP on my own was that I thought I was going crazy when I was finding in the Scriptures that the "river of fire" scene in Daniel 7 would take place during the times of the fourth beast and the little horn. A direct contradiction for PP and PM in that the Jews awaited a "judgment day" during the times of the final sea beast from Daniel in which the Messiah would appear and destroy it. So I had to rebuild from there and it all comes to a nice head.
So I'm aware of the PP arguments as I used to defend them. Problem is that the "river of fire" in Daniel 7 isn't at the "end of time", it's during the time of the fourth sea beast, which even PP acknowledges as Rome. So the "river of fire" during Roman rule? And as for the resurrection taking place for all who had died and would live then in Dan 12, it is not at the "end of time" either; it takes place in the days of the Savior. (Heb 9:26) These 2 problems alone upgrade PP to FP, imo.
I haven't but thanks for the reference! I've never read anything about FP so if you know of any good speakers or writers on it I'd love to hear more about it.
@mooglecharmed I was a FP and now am probably more of an idealist preterist. I think MT4 and associated passages were fulfilled. I read NT Wright's NTP, J & VG and the third one in this series. The one thing I got out of it which I felt I had to reverse on is that the general resurrection has not taken place. Wright argues forcefully from their culture of that time it would have to be physical and not spiritual as a FP who have to argue. Any comments?
WOW, no longer a Full Preterist! Man my heart sunk when I heard that. I'm still shocked. Well, people shouldn't unsubscribe, I guess something has been eating at you and it was time to move away from that view. While I can't fully agree 100% on any eschatology views, Christ knows are hearts, if we are wrong or right, Christ knows thats what we believe and wouldn't hold something like that against us, in entering the Kingdom Of God, so we shouldn't hold it against each other. Continued
I am willing to say that there is really no grey area meaning that absolute truth will not leave anyone to be partial in anything...it takes massive amounts of faith to reject the Darby/years of traditional teaching of dispensationalism and read the text for what it is...we are under grace now! The full preterist view on scripture is so accurate and also as you are saved it takes a certain amount of faith to fully believe that all things are fully fulfilled...grace and peace to you
One more note, God bless you mightily for your humility and willingness to make this statement! Matt 24 is fulfilled, as well as most of Revelation. But full preterism is indeed error. I think they took a good thing too far. God bless!
Good to hear! I could never see lack of bodily resurrection, since the scriptures were always so plain to me that this will occur. However, I am not a Calvinist and I also believe the great white throne judgment occurs at a single time at which all saints and unbelievers will attend. Saints will be judged for their rewards, and not for salvation since salvation is already theirs. Partial Preterism is indeed more correct than full, although I like to call it Kingdom Eschatology.
Biblical judgment is never about rewards it is about guilty/innocent. And we are innocent if we are in Christ. Paul seems to think that no rewards are lacking in Ephesians 1 and 2.
From your video I am not sure as to what changed your mind and am not certain on what passage you would base a "third" resurrection on. Our baptism represents that we are already alive therefore the second death does not harm us since we will "never die" (John 11:25-26) if we remain spiritually alive in Christ. The Spirit is a seal that we will never die and if we will never again die once in Christ then how can we be resurrected? Resurrections are for the dead and we aren't that ever again.
*"second" resurrection, not "third", sorry. It's funny how people will give me a thumb's down or poke at FP in comments but nobody will answer my question and nobody will address why the resurrection in the bible is spiritual and there is no mention of a second one relating to a physical body.
You haven't even so much as TOUCHED the point that Daniel was promised to inherit this resurrection at the time of Jesus and the Temple being destroyed. Again -- WHERE are the bodies of the holy people who were "asleep" before Daniel's time, during, and since? Or are you just going to accuse me of something that you yourself might really be up to?
I have no ill feelings at all bro nor do I doubt your sincerity for a moment. I think you will be hard pressed however, to validate your new stance in scripture but I must leave that with you. God bless you always.
1 tim 4:7 But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise yourself rather to godliness. 8 For bodily exercise profits little: but godliness is profitable to all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. 9 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. 10 For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, specially of those that believe.
Your time is your life, why do you waste your time on endless points of doctrine when it could be used to preach to the lost. What do you think is more important argue these minor differences than to minister the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to the Hindu,Buddhist,Bahia's and several billion other unsaved peoples?
Greetings, I am waiting to hear more information before I post a yay or nay. But , I pray that you are guided in your decisions. Please be aware of one Roderick Edwards. He has already"embraced"you because you have"left" a movement per say. Do not trust him no matter what. See what he did to Dr Kenneth Talbot who reached out to him...be careful and God bless.
A person has to be totally convinced when they believe something and without a doubt a complete sellout. I do believe it is dangerous to waver..a double minded man is unstable in all his ways James tells us.Continue in your study,exhaust all resources until you are left with nothing but the facts and once you reach that place where there is no more to dig for,then my friend you have reached it. I hope you find what your looking for.Once I seen this message,there is no turning back.God Bless
Vince, this is very good news! I am glad you are returning to the community of saints. Please check out pretblog & the article I wrote about your announcement.
All we can do is keep studying and asking the Holy Spirit to guide us.... Thankfully salvation / reconciliation isn't based on perfect doctrine, but on Christ Jesus alone!
So we can do two things... keep studying, praying and speculating... or like most Christians do... just stick our heads in the sand and just wait til everything happens in it's own time.
All in all... that we maintain and grow in love for God and one another is what is really important. :)
I know this must have been a tough video to make, and I admire you for making it. How can I be mad? How can anyone be upset at you for following your convictions after sincere study of the Word?
Still love ya, bro! And I look forward to hearing more from you on this issue and others.
how can anyone be mad at cha bro? You are a true gentleman. I really appreciate your video and i look forward to anymore that you produce in explaining your views.
You also have my word that if ANY "preterists" start bad-mouthing you on SGP because of this, they will be canned.
Youu are always welcomed at SGP. Don't ever hesitate to express your current position over there and i will try my darnedest in moderating to keep things respectable and civil.
Vince: As you know, I do not believe Eschatology is a Salvational matter and I do not cast people aside as useless or worthless simply because they change positions in their Eschatology. Simply admit you are a Partial Preterist, you do believe in a physical resurrection, and a 3rd return of Christ, even though it's not mentioned per say.
There is not third coming of Jesus in partial preterism. the coming of the Lord in AD70 was localized judgment in Judaea alone. It is not the generalized sort of comings such as the first in His incarnation and the second at the physical resurrection.
@mfblume2 It was localized judgment in Judea alone? What are you calling Judea? Because Rome burnt & leveled hundreds of town throughout the entire land of Israel and all throughout the Roman empire wherever Israelites lived. Are you saying the entire Roman Empire was Judea?
@mfblume2 There is not third coming oh Jesus in partial preterism? Sure there is; you just redefine what coming means to get around it. Partial Preterists say 66-74? AD was a TYPE of coming. No matter how you slice it, to insist upon another "coming" makes it 3
Don't know you but I am happy for you! It's very hard to break people from certain doctrines and this is one of them. God did the breaking! it is also amazing that you have made a video that contradicts your old stand. That takes a lot of guts and I've never seen anyone who did that before since I came on youtube. There's more truth for you to discover. Keep seeking God's face. I know He has great plans to use you greatly.
No problem man. I respect you a great deal. You must be faithful to that which you believe. You are always welcome anywhere I go. Some people will obviously use you for their deceitful purposes but there's nothing you can do about that. It still sounds as though your views are extremely close to FB. Some FB's hold to IBD, which sounds very close to your thinking. You are extremely well-respected by a whole lot of folks.
Thanks Tami, I love you too. You know we don't always agree on everything, but it is amazing how God's LOVE glues us together. I hope this is an example for other Christians to look to our unity in Him.
Not all the Olivet discourse has been fulfilled. In Matthew 24, Jesus talks about his return being like the days of Noah. That means that the fallen angels are going to return to mate with women like they did in Genesis 6. It says in Revelation that Michael will kick Satan and his angels down before Jesus returns. So, not all scripture has been fulfilled yet.
Now, some of Matthew 24 may have been about 70 A.D. because it was addressed to the Jews, but some was in the distant future.
sptrfn 3 months ago
We sure all learning and growing aren't we? It takes humility for a person to change ones views. Someone else who is a "partial preterist" and a dear friend of mine is Steve Gregg. You may find his lectures interesting. They are all free on his website the narrow path dot com (all that's run together in the URL of course). He is also the author of Revelation four views: a parallel commentary.
faithandpractice 8 months ago
i agree moogle futurist of any kind have to dance over the obvious time frame first century.
turtletype 9 months ago
Another key is the mathematical precision of FULFILLED prophecy
watch?v=ManZPZeROdc
beholdthebeast. com/mathematical_precision_of_prophecy. htm
watch?v=7TKpuAsRiNM
watch?v=N39msxDcJiE
PeteWaldo 1 year ago
Once the Lord helps us overcome a false doctrine, the scales begin to be removed from our eyes. All the "overcommeth"ing of Rev chapters 2 and 3 isn't about overcoming Satan, except as he is the author of false doctrine.
Sadly, eschatology in the 20th century church, was limited to preterism and futurism, with the church blind to the traditional continuous-historic context with the exception of a few cults.
watch?v=_KtSpB4Id8I
One key lies in the lion, bear & leopard
watch?v=dJODE7Q2KcM
PeteWaldo 1 year ago
"Armageddon" is not about a future battle! It is about Jesus crucifixion. "Wormwood" is not a meteor but actually describes the eventual destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. Why? because Jeremiah mentions the same word during and before the babylonians destroyed the 1st temple - Jeremiah 23:15,Lamentations 3:15,Lamentations 3:19 and even Amos 5:7! Please read through my blog to understand my comments.
cris750 1 year ago
What do you mean by an individual resurrection? I am curious. You can message me.
MrsRosengard 1 year ago
@MrsRosengard By individual resurrection, I mean the redemption of each soul's self-same body from corruption under the curse. I just started reading Ladd's "Blessed Hope" today, where in the introduction he describes the redemption of individuals and also society.
Bibletouchstone 1 year ago
I just learned about preterist. I am starting to think that some of rev was already fulfilled but I am unsure about why we are still here. Why is the earth still full of sin? Apparently God hasnt not destroyed all sin yet, which I think is his plan. It's so confusing.
MrsRosengard 1 year ago
amzing that i have come from the other extreme of dispensationalism. I am no longer a dispensationalist. And we have come to the same conclusions, it seems. In fact, i just recently heard the word "preterism" and what it means; and i've been saved 25 yrs! and i do study a lot. But have avoided eschatology for a long time because it's a tough thing to figure out and so much debating that has led to NOWHERE. I, also believe in a rapture but not a 7 year trib.
to be cont.
randellmd 1 year ago
I WOULD CONSIDER MY SELF A FULL PRETERIST AND I ALSO BELIEVE THAT ALL WILL STAND BEFORE GOD IN JUDGMENT. MAYBE I JUST DONT KNOW PRETERISM WELL ENOUGH BUT I CANT BELIEVE PRETERIST DONT BELIEVE THAT THEY WILL STAND BEFORE GOD IN JUDGMENT WHEN THEY DIE. IF THIS IS WHATS MAKES YOU SAY YOUVE CHANGED YOUR POSITION THEN I GUESS IM WITH YOU.
imsuckingwind 1 year ago
Grace to you... Ken Gentry's work is the best on this issue.
kaleowao 2 years ago
Israel is anti christ to they passed an anti missionary law in israel 1977thats more in line with scripture since they wanna third temple to resume sacrafices..killed christ and stilll teach their own from the talmud he is a sorcerrer.the zionist infultrated the "church"for strategic purposes a long timeago.they wanna resume sacrafices in this temple.can you get more anti christ than that.dont believe me?you have a computer at your finger tips go ask a rabbiWAKE UP CHRISTIANS PRETERIST OR NOT!
MikeGram101 2 years ago
I meant no insult. Sorry if you thought I did. I have addressed your points, mooglecharmed. :) And I have read all those verses many times. Take care!
mfblume2 2 years ago
Not really. Bye.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 3
Mfblume, you're seriously an arrogant person. Accusing me of going outside the bible simply because you disagree with me makes you an awful teacher and I do not respect you. I could just as easily underhandedly insult you by saying that your comprehension of terms is comparable to that of a little kid's. I've proven you wrong time and time again and I even provided some verses and you called them "wrong." (cont.)
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 4
Now, concerning Romans 6, its obviously in the past... BUT IT ALSO SPEAKS OF THE FUTURE! Paul spoke in BOTH future AND present tenses in 1Cor 15 as well! This is really not even a debate at this point since you are so mixed up in how to even make your points.
"And spiritual bodies are like that of Christ's with which he came from the tomb."
And YOU wanna call me "extrabiblical"? Spiritual bodies are alive in our bodies now and will match the ones that Daniel and those alseep got.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 5
Calm down. Let's not involve emotions in this. Rom 6 is about every believer's PAST death with Christ that occurred at initial salvation. And that is not the physical death noted in 1 Cor 15. Spiritual bodies are mortal bodies CHANGED and ALTERED into immortal bodies. It is spiritual versus natural, not non-physical versus physical. The same adjectives are used in the same epistle in chapter 2. And they are not speaking of composite material. No one got any new bodies in AD70.
mfblume2 2 years ago
Calm down? You're the one accusing me of lying and instead of apologize you tell me to calm down. Yeah, Christ would be proud. Moving along, Romans 6 is about a believers past death... for the third time, that is NOT my point. The point is that the BODY IS DEAD! You cannot call Romans 8:10 wrong any longer, mfblume2, I won't allow this. Now then, 1Cor 15 ALSO speaks of the past "individual resurrections" but it also speaks of one which would consummate the faith and occur any moment.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 2
I never accused anyone, let alone you, of lying here. You are just incorrect in your interpretations. So again, please calm down. Do not be so defensive. I never said Rom 8:10 is wrong either. Just your interpretation of it. You clearly are not being reasonable due to your emotions and mistakening not just the bible, but now also my words to be offensive. . Thanks for the chat. Again, take care.
mfblume2 2 years ago
Romasn 6 speaks of a resurrection that is spiritual that follows after spiritual death with Christ. Paul did not say he had not yet experienced this resurrection as you demand. He spoke in the sense of sequence, saying that after spiritual death with Christ shall occur spiritual resurrection. That is why Rom 6:13 speaks of resurrection in Paul's present, not future, tense, ALIVE FROM THE DEAD.
mfblume2 2 years ago
You're mixed up again. Paul said in 6:5 that this had taken place but is related to a MUCH larger scale resurrection that was coming at any moment. Resurrection they eagerly awaited in Rom 8:18-24 EVEN THOUGH they had already come to life by dying to sin and the law.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 5
I meant no insult. Just stating that full preterism's interpretations of resurrection passages requires thoughts not stated plainly in the bible. The verses are not wrong. Your interpretation is wrong. Anyway, you are showing your fruits now.
mfblume2 2 years ago
You didn't mean it as an insult? Could have fooled me since you just say it baselessly and avoid the points I make. Yes, they are plainly stated in the bible. I have plainly stated them over and over again. Daniel would receive this inheritance of resurrection while those still physically alive would be transformed by the official glory of Jesus in his kingdom that came unobserved. Dan 12, 1Thess 4, Rev 1, Luke 20:21, Heb 2:8. I double-dare you to read the passages.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 4
Bibletouchstone and I have conversed a lot of preterism, and I am partial preterist. My youtube site has several videos about the contrast between full and partial. Check 'em out!
mfblume2 2 years ago
Hey Bro.....
I am just coming into full preterism, havinf learned alot from revelation and deduction. I don't understand why you do not consider yourself a full preterist....
Please advise
Lifemelody1
Lifemelody1 2 years ago 3
I'm a Full Preterist, but I admit, I kinda hope the whole futurist view is correct and I'm wrong. I would love to see some rapture of some type, like so many I've have heard. I would love for it to be a pretrib, but to me, scripture is clear, it's post. I've heard for years by pastors of a secret rapture, which I reject today, but I would love to be a part of what they believe, and meeting them in the air. I just don't see it. I hope I'm wrong, but will always be FullPreterist I think, peace
MrEternal777 2 years ago 3
1 Thess 4 just cannot be interpreted any other way than a physical resurrection, since anything else requires teachings never clearly stated in scripture anywhere!
mfblume2 2 years ago
Yes, it can be interpreted in another way, mfblume2. The "rapture" is not a physical resurrection, it when the Temple fell and Jerusalem was judged that proved Jesus a true prophet of God, the Son of God and the Judge of all men. It was when the saints officially partook of God's heavenly kingdom and judging the fallen, physical kingdom. The Temple was where God dwelt and with no Temple then what sign did the Jews have for God being with them? But Jesus is our sign.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago
This is what I meant. A person has to contrive all these thoughts the bible never plainly states to see no physical resurrection here. 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15 plainly teach physical resurrection. The Bible is not hidden with mystical meanings not plainly presented as I believe your thought requires.
mfblume2 2 years ago
That's simply untrue, mfblume2. 1Cor 15 is about the spiritual resurrection and nothing else. In fact it calls the spiritual body the seed for the spiritual body (42-44). Then it goes on to say that "flesh and blood CANNOT inherit the kingdom." So explain to me now what I contrived because that's a fancy way of saying I'm deliberately LYING and I've just proven in that I'm not.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago
CORRECTION: "In fact it calls the *PHYSICAL BODY the seed for the spiritual (42-44)." Sorry
mooglecharmed 2 years ago
The physical body is a seed that CHANGES into a spiritual body, as a seed changes to a stalk. A seed is not left in the ground for a different body not derived from it to exist. As Jesus physically arose in a supernatural spiritual body, so shall we. Hence, He is firstfruits. First of many identicals to follow. That is the plain reading of 1 Cor 15.
mfblume2 2 years ago
No, the physical body has to die in order to become spiritually alive. Do you even read the bible? lol. It only CHANGED the Corinthians and their contemporaries who witnessed the kingdom come and the Temple crumble under Romans. But those who were in literal graves "asleep" received their spiritual body just like Daniel was promised to. (Dan 12:1-4, Rev 12:10, 5:10)
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 2
1 Cor 15 is about the BODY. The reason our BODIES shall be changed is because flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom. Hence, the FLESH needs to be changed. A spiritual body is not a non-physical body. It is not physical verses non-physical, but spiritual versus natural.
mfblume2 2 years ago
No, the flesh needs to DIE, not change. Paul is already talking about them being dead in every single one of his letters! (Rom 8:10, 6:5-7, etc.) He constantly says that they are already dead and that their spirit is what lives. The resurrection promised to Daniel in Dan 12 has to do with those who were ALREADY dead being raised to life - Daniel included - when the kingdom came and the Temple desolated. Did they get physical bodies back? No. They came to life, however. Its spiritual. :)
mooglecharmed 2 years ago
Wrong, all shall be changed but not all shall die. The death in those references you make is speaking about spiritual death, and spiritual death with Christ through His death. Paul spoke in the future tense in 1 Cor 15, whereas he spoke in past tense in Romans 6. And spiritual bodies are like that of Christ's with which he came from the tomb. Phil 3:21 says our bodies shall experience the same thing. Again, you require extrabiblical thought to say your beliefs.
mfblume2 2 years ago
Its funny because you are making my points for me, mfblume2. When the "resurrection" came that you call "the rapture" it was when the people who were "asleep" (Daniel, and those before him, for example) would receive their promise and those who still never "fell asleep" would be transformed somehow, "unobserved", as the kingdom of Jesus was officially and visibly favored by God.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 4
No resurrection occurred in AD70. 1 Cor 15 so plainly teaches that physical bodies shall be changed. All shall be changed, but not all shall die. Paul explicitly said this. And this is speaking of saints alone. :) There are two resurrections. The first is spiritual and is salvation (Rom 6:11, 13). Rev 20:5. Jesus spoke of salvation as a resurrection in John 5:24-25. He then spoke of physical resurrection from the graves in John 5:28-29. Daniel 12 spoke of salvation as a resurrection.
mfblume2 2 years ago
"Daniel 12 spoke of salvation as a resurrection." No, he was told of both. He was told that when the Temple came down it would be by the will of God in order to usher in God's kingdom. He was also told that he would be rewarded after that time. Just so happens that resurrection is the ultimate reward for saints. Go figure. I mean what are the odds... hmm.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 2
I've had those thoughts myself, MrEternal. However, to advocate against FP, I think, is to leave many serious time-sensitive fulfillments incomplete when the prophets said they would be. For example, the "resurrection" that Daniel is promised in Dan 12:13 (the whole ch. really) to take place when Heb 1:1-2, 9:26 say they do. This "resurrection" would come with the awaited kingdom of heaven. You can't have one without the other. Just like the kingdom coming, the resurrection was unobserved.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago
Part1
you said I've had those thoughts myself, MrEternal. However, to advocate against FP, I think, is to leave many serious time-sensitive fulfillments incomplete when the prophets said they would be.
I agree 100%, thats why I'm Full Preterist. In fact for me, not being a Full Preterist would make "ME" feel like I'm calling prophets and Christ a liar, GOD FORBID.
Now reading what the prophets, Christ and every other writer wrote in the scriptures, to me, is all 1st century.
MrEternal777 2 years ago 3
I generally hold all preterist "time-statements" fulfilled. Prophecy is too complicated for one to hapazardly lump all prophecy into one event.
Bibletouchstone 2 years ago
@Bibletouchstone
Did mike have a part to play in your change of Belief?
tmat04 1 year ago
@tmat04 Don't know which Mike you mean--but not likely.
Bibletouchstone 1 year ago
@Bibletouchstone
Mike Blume, (mfblume2)! I saw some videos in which you had a discussion with him.
tmat04 1 year ago
@tmat04 No, not so much--but I am glad to have had the discussion with him.
Bibletouchstone 1 year ago
@Bibletouchstone
I scribe to the Preterist view. I think it is more accurate, according to the Bible, than is the Futurist view, which I gave credence to for years.
I do not believe that the Resurrection is physical. I believe that the RESURRECTION is CHRIST and CHRIST is the RESURRECTION! It takes place as an INNER BODY and an OUT-OF-BODY experience.
tmat04 1 year ago
Part 2
Now I don't care if the book of Revelation says after the Second Coming Christ splits the earth into 3. Then I see on the news the earth is still one. I will still agree with the scripture saying it is split in 3. Many well say well look, that hasn't been fulfilled. No to you it hasn't been fulfilled, to me it means something THAT I DONT UNDERSTAND AS A MAN, not that, well it never happened yet. Like you said and I agree, will always be a Full Preterist. As far as partial preterist
MrEternal777 2 years ago
part 3
as far as partial preterist, I learned not to even bother. It's pretty hard to change someone. Yes all things are possible threw the Lord, I'll comment before anyway says that, but it's not easy. I find it more irritating then anything. I believe in a high percent how someone is raised, its what they believe threw out thier life mostly. I was raised futurist, and became Full preterist around 20, and no looking back, peace
MrEternal777 2 years ago 3
I was a Pre-millenialist before I came to Christ at 20. In fact it was fear of "the apocalypse" and anticipation of "the rapture" that I was saved in the first place. I became Partial Preterist about 4 years later. Within the last year I made the switch to FP but not based on any FP arguments; it was actually due to me combining history and prophecy with PP and a better sense of Messianic Kingdom background from men like NT Wright in NTPG and J&VG.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 5
The reason I mention that I sort of discovered FP on my own was that I thought I was going crazy when I was finding in the Scriptures that the "river of fire" scene in Daniel 7 would take place during the times of the fourth beast and the little horn. A direct contradiction for PP and PM in that the Jews awaited a "judgment day" during the times of the final sea beast from Daniel in which the Messiah would appear and destroy it. So I had to rebuild from there and it all comes to a nice head.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 3
So I'm aware of the PP arguments as I used to defend them. Problem is that the "river of fire" in Daniel 7 isn't at the "end of time", it's during the time of the fourth sea beast, which even PP acknowledges as Rome. So the "river of fire" during Roman rule? And as for the resurrection taking place for all who had died and would live then in Dan 12, it is not at the "end of time" either; it takes place in the days of the Savior. (Heb 9:26) These 2 problems alone upgrade PP to FP, imo.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 3
dude have you ever read any Don K Preston books? Dude is amazing, and has destroyed anybody who has debated, bad to.
MrEternal777 2 years ago 2
I haven't but thanks for the reference! I've never read anything about FP so if you know of any good speakers or writers on it I'd love to hear more about it.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago
@mooglecharmed I was a FP and now am probably more of an idealist preterist. I think MT4 and associated passages were fulfilled. I read NT Wright's NTP, J & VG and the third one in this series. The one thing I got out of it which I felt I had to reverse on is that the general resurrection has not taken place. Wright argues forcefully from their culture of that time it would have to be physical and not spiritual as a FP who have to argue. Any comments?
knightday1973 1 year ago
WOW, no longer a Full Preterist! Man my heart sunk when I heard that. I'm still shocked. Well, people shouldn't unsubscribe, I guess something has been eating at you and it was time to move away from that view. While I can't fully agree 100% on any eschatology views, Christ knows are hearts, if we are wrong or right, Christ knows thats what we believe and wouldn't hold something like that against us, in entering the Kingdom Of God, so we shouldn't hold it against each other. Continued
MrEternal777 2 years ago 2
I think you have made the right move.
4096x 2 years ago
I have a mountain to share on this, I hope to keep you posted over the next few months. Grace to you!
Bibletouchstone 2 years ago
I am willing to say that there is really no grey area meaning that absolute truth will not leave anyone to be partial in anything...it takes massive amounts of faith to reject the Darby/years of traditional teaching of dispensationalism and read the text for what it is...we are under grace now! The full preterist view on scripture is so accurate and also as you are saved it takes a certain amount of faith to fully believe that all things are fully fulfilled...grace and peace to you
Nezie1 2 years ago
One more note, God bless you mightily for your humility and willingness to make this statement! Matt 24 is fulfilled, as well as most of Revelation. But full preterism is indeed error. I think they took a good thing too far. God bless!
mfblume2 2 years ago
Thanks for your comments, Mike. God bless you.
Bibletouchstone 2 years ago
Good to hear! I could never see lack of bodily resurrection, since the scriptures were always so plain to me that this will occur. However, I am not a Calvinist and I also believe the great white throne judgment occurs at a single time at which all saints and unbelievers will attend. Saints will be judged for their rewards, and not for salvation since salvation is already theirs. Partial Preterism is indeed more correct than full, although I like to call it Kingdom Eschatology.
mfblume2 2 years ago
Biblical judgment is never about rewards it is about guilty/innocent. And we are innocent if we are in Christ. Paul seems to think that no rewards are lacking in Ephesians 1 and 2.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago
1 Cor 3 speaks of rewards -- gold, silver or precious stones... wood, hay or stubble.
mfblume2 2 years ago
From your video I am not sure as to what changed your mind and am not certain on what passage you would base a "third" resurrection on. Our baptism represents that we are already alive therefore the second death does not harm us since we will "never die" (John 11:25-26) if we remain spiritually alive in Christ. The Spirit is a seal that we will never die and if we will never again die once in Christ then how can we be resurrected? Resurrections are for the dead and we aren't that ever again.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago
*"second" resurrection, not "third", sorry. It's funny how people will give me a thumb's down or poke at FP in comments but nobody will answer my question and nobody will address why the resurrection in the bible is spiritual and there is no mention of a second one relating to a physical body.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 4
1 Cor 15 is clearly physical. It's about BODIES. WITH WHAT BODY doe they rise?, Paul asked. :)
mfblume2 2 years ago
You haven't even so much as TOUCHED the point that Daniel was promised to inherit this resurrection at the time of Jesus and the Temple being destroyed. Again -- WHERE are the bodies of the holy people who were "asleep" before Daniel's time, during, and since? Or are you just going to accuse me of something that you yourself might really be up to?
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 2
Hey, would you like to talk on the phone sometime? I could answer your questions. Message me if you do. God bless.
Bibletouchstone 2 years ago
Praise the Lord. Be ready for the wolves to come after you. They smell blood and you are now their enemy.
pretheresy 2 years ago
I have no ill feelings at all bro nor do I doubt your sincerity for a moment. I think you will be hard pressed however, to validate your new stance in scripture but I must leave that with you. God bless you always.
disciplesindeed 2 years ago
I am glad that you are one step farther, God Bless.
Yesheyah 2 years ago 2
Amen Still think you have a way to go but you are now an Orthodox Christian.
zaw92 2 years ago
1 tim 4:7 But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise yourself rather to godliness. 8 For bodily exercise profits little: but godliness is profitable to all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. 9 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. 10 For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, specially of those that believe.
packrat28401 2 years ago
Your time is your life, why do you waste your time on endless points of doctrine when it could be used to preach to the lost. What do you think is more important argue these minor differences than to minister the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to the Hindu,Buddhist,Bahia's and several billion other unsaved peoples?
Crucify your religious pride and return to plow.
packrat28401 2 years ago
Greetings, I am waiting to hear more information before I post a yay or nay. But , I pray that you are guided in your decisions. Please be aware of one Roderick Edwards. He has already"embraced"you because you have"left" a movement per say. Do not trust him no matter what. See what he did to Dr Kenneth Talbot who reached out to him...be careful and God bless.
preterist28 2 years ago
Amen!
ChristianTULIP 2 years ago
A person has to be totally convinced when they believe something and without a doubt a complete sellout. I do believe it is dangerous to waver..a double minded man is unstable in all his ways James tells us.Continue in your study,exhaust all resources until you are left with nothing but the facts and once you reach that place where there is no more to dig for,then my friend you have reached it. I hope you find what your looking for.Once I seen this message,there is no turning back.God Bless
OnlyTheScriptures 2 years ago
Vince, this is very good news! I am glad you are returning to the community of saints. Please check out pretblog & the article I wrote about your announcement.
thekingdomcomedotcom 2 years ago
All we can do is keep studying and asking the Holy Spirit to guide us.... Thankfully salvation / reconciliation isn't based on perfect doctrine, but on Christ Jesus alone!
So we can do two things... keep studying, praying and speculating... or like most Christians do... just stick our heads in the sand and just wait til everything happens in it's own time.
All in all... that we maintain and grow in love for God and one another is what is really important. :)
Peace :)
ChristianNewsWatch 2 years ago
I know this must have been a tough video to make, and I admire you for making it. How can I be mad? How can anyone be upset at you for following your convictions after sincere study of the Word?
Still love ya, bro! And I look forward to hearing more from you on this issue and others.
ATLpirate 2 years ago
Grace and Peace to you! Will keep you tuned in, brother!
Bibletouchstone 2 years ago
how can anyone be mad at cha bro? You are a true gentleman. I really appreciate your video and i look forward to anymore that you produce in explaining your views.
You also have my word that if ANY "preterists" start bad-mouthing you on SGP because of this, they will be canned.
Youu are always welcomed at SGP. Don't ever hesitate to express your current position over there and i will try my darnedest in moderating to keep things respectable and civil.
kingnebster 2 years ago
Thanks bro! I do intend to give some explaining videos with some exegesis as the Lord permits. Grace to you!
Bibletouchstone 2 years ago
keep reading - you just got one step closer to the truth-many more to go-whew
nicklasarthur 2 years ago
Vince: As you know, I do not believe Eschatology is a Salvational matter and I do not cast people aside as useless or worthless simply because they change positions in their Eschatology. Simply admit you are a Partial Preterist, you do believe in a physical resurrection, and a 3rd return of Christ, even though it's not mentioned per say.
God Bless. Eschatology 101
Eschatology101 2 years ago
There is not third coming of Jesus in partial preterism. the coming of the Lord in AD70 was localized judgment in Judaea alone. It is not the generalized sort of comings such as the first in His incarnation and the second at the physical resurrection.
mfblume2 2 years ago
@mfblume2 It was localized judgment in Judea alone? What are you calling Judea? Because Rome burnt & leveled hundreds of town throughout the entire land of Israel and all throughout the Roman empire wherever Israelites lived. Are you saying the entire Roman Empire was Judea?
Eschatology101 1 year ago
@mfblume2 There is not third coming oh Jesus in partial preterism? Sure there is; you just redefine what coming means to get around it. Partial Preterists say 66-74? AD was a TYPE of coming. No matter how you slice it, to insist upon another "coming" makes it 3
Eschatology101 1 year ago
Don't know you but I am happy for you! It's very hard to break people from certain doctrines and this is one of them. God did the breaking! it is also amazing that you have made a video that contradicts your old stand. That takes a lot of guts and I've never seen anyone who did that before since I came on youtube. There's more truth for you to discover. Keep seeking God's face. I know He has great plans to use you greatly.
okebaram 2 years ago 2
Amen. Bibletouchstone is a class A guy! Even when we disagreed over issues, he kept a Christian spirit and was kind.
mfblume2 2 years ago
I'm glad he didn't accuse you of lying like you like to.
mooglecharmed 2 years ago 3
No problem man. I respect you a great deal. You must be faithful to that which you believe. You are always welcome anywhere I go. Some people will obviously use you for their deceitful purposes but there's nothing you can do about that. It still sounds as though your views are extremely close to FB. Some FB's hold to IBD, which sounds very close to your thinking. You are extremely well-respected by a whole lot of folks.
Love you brother,
Chuck
mosesfly 2 years ago
I love you, my dear brother Vincent!
flannery0 2 years ago 4
Thanks Tami, I love you too. You know we don't always agree on everything, but it is amazing how God's LOVE glues us together. I hope this is an example for other Christians to look to our unity in Him.
Bibletouchstone 2 years ago