This point is probably agreed; except that your presupposition of an external, once for all "second coming" in AD70 seems not to be Nate's assumption.  I think that a pret-idealist would tend to see the judgment of the Lord in AD66-70 as the external show of the true invisible par-ousia/essense which comes to people individually. The real ripping out of context is making the letter the focus by declaring that the manifestation of the substance is the substance itself.   Paul lays the case out that both Pharaoh and Israel were ordained to endure the judgment of God, in his manifestation of invisible things:

 

9:17-22 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.  Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.  Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault ? For who hath resisted his will?  Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to  make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if  God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:  And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory

 

Those who were "in the covenant" were in such place since before creation.  To state that people weren't in the covenant until the natural was taken away in AD70 is quite different from saying that it wasn't revealed until as such until the natural was taken out of the way.  For anyone interested, here is a link to John Gill's "Body of Divinity" where he addresses "The Everlasting Covenant."

"It is an "eternal" covenant; not merely as to duration, being what will continue to eternity, and so is called an everlasting covenant, but as to the original of it; it was made in eternity, and commenced and bears date from eternity. " (Properties of the Everlasting Covenant)

I hope you can see how fundamentally Dispensationalist this tendency is in nature by saying that God's working with men was different then than it is now, as though God changed plans, as opposed to removing the shadow to fully revealing what had been the substance all along.  Also, I pray that whoever is reading will recognize the consequences this assumption has on the Word of God's ministry within believers.   When only regarding the letter of the Bible (ignoring its everlasting substance), every passage in the Bible is assigned to a fundamentally different world, and verses can only be understood when passed through the prism of "the context of full preterism".  And even after readjusting for this new context, and personal application is still only a secondary speculative usage.

 

With love in Christ,
TD

---

Date: 08 Dec 2006
Time: 17:55:05

Comments:

Todd writes:
Those who were "in the covenant" were in such place since before creation. To state that people weren't in the covenant until the natural was taken away in AD70 is quite different from saying that it wasn't revealed until as such until the natural was taken out of the way.

Todd you use many fancy words, but rarely do I see scripture used to support your claims. Bottom line is that we today are in a different position then the first century saints.

No one said that these people did not or were not saved in the same way from the beginning till now.

To have something by faith is quite different then to have it in completion. No reformed person that I know says that anyone was saved in a different way, but you and I both know that the gospel truths were not made as clear or obvious until the Christ came.

10Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, 11trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. 12It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things.

The traditional reformed view is that the gospel was like a flower. A closed bud in its early stages and an open one in its late stages. ie REVEALED. No one has argued against this Todd.

The traditional reformed view is nothing close to dispensational. Dispensation teaches that men were saved in different ways. That has nothing to do woth what we are saying.

Your attempt to connect it, as such, is nothing but a scare tactic to get people to go to your "private interpretation" just like your recnt postings about people leaving "modern preterism".

You can not apply these verses in the same way to people today because you say that we are in the kingdom already.

Bottom line Todd. Do you believe that we are in the kindom now? Yes or no? You seem to have been waivering to and fro at our study about this ie (physical death). Maybe because it does not fit your theology is the reason why?

If yes, then we are in a different position then the 1st century saints.

Your friend MB.

---

Date: 08 Dec 2006
Time: 22:58:11

Comments:

I absolutely believe the saints possess the kingdom -- although it is a heavenly kingdom outside of time, and not of this world.  The kingdom of Christ on earth is the kingdom within.   Certainly, though, they did not have to wait until AD70 to receive it.    What IS different about that generation, however, is the general revelation of that fact in the historical manifestation of God's purchased possession.  There are many passages which speak in past tense of saints receiving the promises prior to AD70, nullifying that obviously dispensational line. 

I'll only post one verse, and then the full context, and then offer a different way of seeing the revelation of the Lord in AD66-70:

Col 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Translated/Methistemi - Aorist active 3rd person singular. 

1) To place in another way: to subsititute, change
2) To put away, remove: generally to remove from one place to another (Liddell & Scott) META as a compound often means 'change'.

Colossians 3 We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you, 4 Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints, 5 For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel; 6 Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth: 7 As ye also learned of Epaphras our dear fellowservant, who is for you a faithful minister of Christ; 8 Who also declared unto us your love in the Spirit.

9 For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding; 10 That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God; 11 Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness;

12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: 14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Verse 26 makes reference to "the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints", again underscoring the distinction between the chronological manifestation and the everlasting substance (as well as the pre-AD70 manifestation to the saints).   The works of the Lord do not have their nature or origin in time.. but they are "laid up in heaven" awaiting their general revelation.

Even the passage you cited makes direct reference to the awaited events being the revealing of Jesus.   Peter makes many references.

1Pe 1:7 That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing (Apokalupsis) of Jesus Christ:

1Pe 4:13 - But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed (Apokalupsis), ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.

To limit the appearing of the Lord to one city in the ancient world goes against the overwhelming evidence in the Bible (and Greek literature).   Please study the connection between the word parousia in the New Testament and the theophanies in the Old Testament.  The LXX even uses the same word ousia in the NT and LXX.  Also, the New Testament usage of epiphaneia is directly linked to parousia in reference to the manifestation of the Lord.  (For more information, note modern preterist Samuel Lee's Dissertation on Eusebius' Theophany, Part I) 

Take note of the way that the coming of the Lord is spoken as more than one event throughout the scriptures... Jesus himself even referring to a ceaseless stream of revelations:

"From now on, you [Caiaphas, the chief priests, the scribes, the elders, the whole Sanhedrin] shall be seeing the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven." (Matt. 26:64; Mk. 14:62; Lk. 22:69) - Taken from Green's 101 Verses

It just so happens that the manifestation of the Lord against the temple was a particularly dramatic one which Moses and the prophets had foretold regarding the eschatology of their nation.  Notice this same usage in Hebrews 9:8, how the oft cited full preterist verse doesn't say that the way into the holiest of all was not opened until the first tabernacle fell, but that the way was not made manifest (Phaneroo - to make visible or known what has been hidden or unknown) until such general theophanic revelation.

Heb 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

However, this was just one manifestation, not the only one.  In fact, from AD66-70 there were similar manifestations all over the Roman Empire as the Jewish nation was slaughtered in ways that even struck Josephus as providential (Wars 2.18.1 'Now the people of Cesarea had slain the Jews that were among them on the very same day and hour [when the Roman soldiers were slain], which one would think must have come to pass by the direction of Providence').

I hope this distinction makes sense.   It is truly not the irresponsible view you may think it is, and represents a more appropriate approach to God's prophetic intent than just seeing one part and declaring it the whole, or of seeing a shadow and declaring it the substance.  

Perhaps instead of using the old method of "what about this? what about that?" so familiar to full preterists (coming from futurists who only want to discredit the view), you could take the study to the Lord, and zero in on the fundamental distinction between "in part"/whole & shadow/substance in your own personal studies and meditations.   If you would like, I suppose I can post more verses for you, but rereading Green's 101 Verses with this distinction in mind will supply enough material for weeks of study.  

God bless,
todd

---

Date: 09 Dec 2006
Time: 11:05:31

Comments:

Todd writes:
I absolutely believe the saints possess the kingdom -- although it is a heavenly kingdom outside of time, and not of this world. Certainly, though, they did not have to wait until AD70 to receive it. What IS different about that generation, however, is the general revelation of that fact in the historical manifestation of God's purchased possession. There are many passages which speak in past tense of saints receiving the promises prior to AD70, nullifying that obviously dispensational line. I'll only post one verse, and then the full context, and then offer a new way of seeing the theophany of the Lord in AD70:

Col 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Todd why did you leave out the surrounding Colossians Ch 1 verses?

Colossians 1
11being strengthened with all power according to his glorious might so that you may have great endurance and patience, and joyfully 12giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of the saints in the kingdom of light. 13For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, 14in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Luke 21
20"When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 28When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near." 32"I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

Matthew 25
33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. 34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.

What you are missing Todd is that when the bible uses past tense, it does not always mean that something has already happened. It means the certainty of an event to happen. This is expained in the Young's Literal Translation. This is nothing new.

They clearly did not have the kingdom mentioned until the judgment. The kingdom was the reward. Redemption was drawing near.

This is not a different kingdom and redemption. They did not have it yet.

Todd quotes:
Colossians 3 We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you, 4 Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints, 5 For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel;

Todd you just made my point by quoting Colosians 3. They were still hoping for that which was "laid up in heaven".

Romans 8
24For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has? 25But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.

Hebrews 11
13All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth. 14People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. 15If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. 16Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.

Above we see even the dead were still waiting for the heavenly city.

Hebrews 11
39These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. 40God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

Both the living and the dead would be made perfect together. Being made perfect corresponds to being in the heavenly city.

Hebrews 9
9Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 11But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;

Hebrews makes the perfect be the tabrnacle or city that they were waiting for in which the sacrifice would make the believer (dead or alive) perfect pertaining to the conscience.

Hebrews clearly makes this perfection in regards to being in the New Jerusalem (heavenly city).

Revelation 21
2And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

Nobody received the city until after the judgment of Revelation 20.

Todd you say the kingdom is not of this world.

John 18
36Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."

I am curious to your thoughts on what this means.

Revelation 11
15Then the seventh angel sounded; and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever."

---

Date: 09 Dec 2006
Time: 14:54:12

Comments:

Mike, you wrote "What you are missing Todd is that when the bible uses past tense, it does not always mean that something has already happened. It means the certainty of an event to happen."

That is a very interesting hermeneutical approach to "problem texts", that's for sure.   Doesn't that seem just a bit too convenient?  If hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son can be insisted upon meaning "will translate us in AD70" then there really is a problem here.   I don't begrudge your right to make a past tense a future tense, but I certainly wouldn't bet my life -- or everlasting life -- on that assumption.   Nor do I think many others would either.

Again, our difference of opinion seems to boil down to one fundamental point:  The difference being the full preterist assumption that all saints were awaiting the creation of those things which wouldn't be made until AD70 vs. the view that they were earnestly desiring the manifestation of those things which were in existence since before creation.    There is really no further point to discuss but this distinction as  absolutely everything else rides on it.

In the meantime though, consider that the bits and pieces of passages you cited about use a deductive method which involves many assumptions. Not to mention the fact that there is not one "fully preterist verse" which looks back at AD70 as the fulfillment.  This renders full preterism a system based entirely upon deduction, as was agreed upon at one of our meetings, if you'll recall.

The bits and pieces of passages you cited about use a deductive method which involves many assumptions -- and assumes the point in question: that only one city in one corner of the ancient globe is in view.  Note also the fact that there is not one "fully preterist verse" which looks back at AD70 as the fulfillment.  This renders full preterism a system based entirely upon deduction, as was agreed upon at one of our meetings, if you'll recall. 

On the other hand, though, there are many "fully preterist verses" which look to their own day (prior to AD70) as enjoying the fulness of the new heavens and earth related realities.  Here are just a few that are close at hand (meaning proximity, not chronology):

• 2 Cor 5:17  "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." (cf. Rev. 21)

• Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. 10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

• Romans 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

• Romans 10:4  "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth."

• Ga 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us"

• Ga 5:1  Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

• 2Co 1:9    But we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the dead: Who delivered us from so great a death, and doth deliver: in whom we trust that he will yet deliver us

• 2Co 5:18  And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation

• Eph 1:3  Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

• Eph 1:22  And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

• Eph 5:14 Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.

• Eph 2:1  And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

• Eph 2:5   Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved)

• Col 2:13   And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses

• Ro 11:7  What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it

There are many more (even going back to "David's tabernacle" and beyond) but this will suffice to show how the reality was already being received by the people of God.

Perhaps it would be helpful to consider if where statements are made regarding the future are referring to other considerations besides AD70. 

First of all, there are those which look forward to the awakening of those who were not yet reconciled.  Second of all, there are those which look forward to the manifestation of the judgment that has already been given, which would be to their rescue (al a Lk. 21:17).  You say I proved your point by focusing on "laid up in heaven", but my point is that this proves that the previously existing reality was already in existence.   Considering the massive amount of persecution they were under by the false sons of God, I'm sure you can understand their earnest expectation for the manifestation of the true sons of God in the fall of the temple system.  Again, this is a matter where my conclusions are being judged by your presuppositions, which (as you know from your discussions with dispensationalists) is not at all profitable.  Another consideration is that some passages which are taken in a chronological sense of history are actually intended in the spatial sense of proximity.

It is my hope and prayer those who are not as absolutely determined to defend "full preterism" against all comers will be able to use this discussion to look at the Word of God as speaking directly to their hearts.  No matter how settled we may find our doctrine, unless it reaches deep within for rest in Christ then it is unprofitable.     All the questions and critical arguments are profitable if charitable, though.. yet are more suited for a discussion board, so if you'd like we can relocate to the Discussion board for further inquiry in the "Questions about Preterist Idealism" section. 

with prayers for openness,
todd

---

Date: 09 Dec 2006
Time: 16:20:11

Comments:

Mike,

There are fundamental differences to what you believe was happening in AD 70 and what I believe was happening. As I have stated previously, the thing on earth, being the “copy and shadow, only represented the true fullness of those things for which they stood. This was also Paul's perspective. Paul did not speak this way to all people, however it was exercised in Hebrews more because a nation of people being rooted in that shadow needed, above all others, a revelation of release from it.

Paul went through great length to discuss the deity of Christ, through whom the world was made, and to whom everything pointed. When he had discussed Christ, His ministry, and the fathers of the faith who were also instrumental in the old covenant. But this is NOT how Paul leaves this. As I posted before…

Hebrews 8
1 Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man. 3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer. 4 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law; 5 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things,

This is the crux of everything we discuss, and if this issue is not at least understood, we will be as brothers pounding our heads against a wall. As when I went from futurist views to preterist views, I have gone from the AD 70 = all is accomplished view to an “AD 70 is a sign to the world of the eternal tribulation, judgment and salvation of those who ‘confess with their [your] mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in their heart that God raised them from the dead, they [you] will be saved…”

This is not a new assumption, but a paradigm shift. Before I would look at all verses and see those that related to AD 70, and which could point beyond. Separating some as “for today” and others as “finished.” Thus limiting God’s scope for those verses to what was only the “copy,” and not applying them to the substance (the eternal and heavenly truth) that the copy was supposed to reveal.

I know you ask about the Pentecost, baptism, communion, pastors. I hold nothing “in part” to be in continuance by man, however they are being done eternally in the person of Christ! Which is a different than I had been believing before. I put them at an end with the destruction of the COPY, and now I see them as being consummated in fullness with the revealing of the SUBSTANCE to the individual today, and always.

There is a reason that every aspect of the parousia was discussed as a “revelation” or “glorification.” The other interesting thing about this view is that beginning with my writing to Ed, I had been seeing that the salvation was primarily a revelation. There were absolutely some physical benefits to that, but the parousia is best understood in revelation, and the resulting glorification. Somehow this parousia has to be understood for the individual today. Do we not believe that the revelation of Christ is still ongoing today? If so, what would make more sense…

1. That the individual experiencing that revelation today had already been saved in an AD 70 destruction of that which was only a copy…

or

2. That the individual is brought from the old and into the new at the point of the revelation of the substance, as the copy destroyed in AD 70 acted out for us in history?

Here are some verses on what they were waiting for.

Rom 2:4 Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance? 5 But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who "will render to each one according to his deeds": 7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; 8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness--indignation and wrath, 9 tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; 10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

Is this really AD 70 only? Or did AD 70 just serve as a revelation to the world that this is true?

Did He “render each one” in AD 70? Including you and me? Or DOES HE render? Therefore AD 70 being a revelation of the true substance.

1 Cor 1:7 so that you come short in no gift, eagerly waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, 8 who will also confirm you to the end, that you may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Is everyone who will be a Christian today, already, even before they receive a revelation “blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Which Paul here lists as the same day in which Christ is [was] revealed…AD 70? Or are those who are currently being saved, because Christ is revealed in their hearts becoming “blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ?” Wasn’t what happened in AD 70 a revelation that this is the way it works “In Christ?

God Bless
Nate

---

Date: 09 Dec 2006
Time: 16:20:11

Comments:

Todd would you mind defining the "first fruits", and "first resurrection" and the "1000 years" in Revelation 20 for me? Thanks. If you would rather, just email it to me since I know you would like to take this somewhere else. I thank you for posting these for me in here, because I know you have to edit and space the words etc.

Todd writes:
That is a very interesting hermeneutical approach to "problem texts", that's for sure. Doesn't that seem just a bit too convenient? If hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son can be insisted upon meaning "will translate us in AD70" then there really is a problem here.

Todd it is not a problem. I get the answer from experts, as I said before. Here is an excerpt and a link to the Young's Literal Bible article about it.

Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible
by Robert Young Author of the Analytical Concordance to the Bible
http://www.ccel.org/bible/ylt/ylt.htm

"That the Hebrews were in the habit of using the past tense to express the certainty of an action taking place, even though the action might not really be performed for some time. And that the Hebrews, in referring to events which might be either past or future were accustomed to act on the principle of transferring themselves mentally to the period and place of the events themselves, and were not content with coldly viewing them as those of a bygone or still coming time; hence the very frequent use of the present tense."

 

---

Date: 10 Dec 2006
Time: 9:11:22

Comments:

You may not think it is a problem, but to my way of thinking changing celebratory past and present-tense references into longing hopes for the future is actually quite a thin pretence upon which to build an entire doctrinal system.    That view insists that in every case in the New Testament where the present substance was joyously celebrated, the author actually was only looking to a period beyond AD70.

Though Paul seems not to have survived until the manifestation of that substance in AD70, he was certainly rejoicing in the substance of the prophetic reality.   The reality was already in total substance, "laid up in heaven" being revealed to people as God saw fit (cf. Matt. 26:64).   The fall of the nation in AD70 was a dramatic manifestation of the substance, but it was not the substance itself -- nor by any stretch the only manifestation, being only an external show in history of an internal reality in Christ.   "the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints"   Therefore, the revelation in history is the secondary show of the substance in Christ, and is not the substance itself (Heb. 8:1-5).   This is why Hebrews would speak of it as a present reality -- because it was!  

That which was not present was the historical manifestation of the everlasting realities.    Those with faith, like Abraham and David, are not subject to that which is in part (Ps 51: thou delightest not in sacrifice; else would I give it), having already laid hold of the substance.   The same holds true for us in our lives, as God manifests to us in our internal/personal circumstances, the same substance He revealed to the Jews in their external/national circumstances.  Without faith (even today), it is impossible to please Him.   We mustn't limit the Word of God to time and place.

What is being fundamentally presented in this series of articles (it seems to me) is that all things were realities, whether they had been manifested or not... and that what full preterist systems say must be accomplished in the first century pret-idealist systems say simply waited to be manifested then.   This is a fundamental difference of approach, with countless critical consequences.

blessings,
todd 

---

Date: 10 Dec 2006
Time: 14:36:48

Comments:

Todd writes:
That which was not present was the historical manifestation of the everlasting realities

Idealist word games. They want to think they could already enter in to the presence of God, but just struggled with the idea (Hebrews 9). Other scriptures that tell us about the same event tell us otherwise.

Revelation 15
5After this I looked and in heaven the temple, that is, the tabernacle of the Testimony, was opened. 6Out of the temple came the seven angels with the seven plagues. They were dressed in clean, shining linen and wore golden sashes around their chests. 7Then one of the four living creatures gave to the seven angels seven golden bowls filled with the wrath of God, who lives for ever and ever. 8And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God and from his power, and no one could enter the temple until the seven plagues of the seven angels were completed.

As a friend put it recently...

The passage says no one could enter until the wrath was fulfilled. Yet you have everyone entering. So why the need for this passage? Preterist Idealism sounds nice, but unfortunately it is becoming more and more evident that it reduces redemptive history to a cartoon of sorts...a metaphor, ...really, redemptive history becomes an allegory, just an allegory. It would be better termed, Allegorical Preterism, because that is what it really is. You have made the cross, resurrection, and parousia merely allegorical events that tell what already happened, not as necessary redemptive events. Again, I would argue that it is a reduction of redemption. The Bible says: If Christ is not raised, you are dead in your sins.

---

Date: 10 Dec 2006
Time: 21:11:32

Comments:

I disagree with the characterization, but that's okay.   The natural events are certainly not only allegories.  However, they are revelations of realities that reach deep into our lives, such as : And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.

Thanks for posting!

blessings,
todd

---

Date: 04 Jun 2007
Time: 10:41:31

Comments:

I am not quite sure what all you are getting it but I hope I am. This has alot of comments and i just wnat to say that if they were not of us because they walked away the that meant they didn't belong anyway. They were not converted in their heart.

---

Date: 14 Nov 2007
Time: 11:03:22

Comments:

And praise the Lord for that!   We should be much more careful before throwing away 2,000 years of Christian history, as though it was somehow misguided!  Imagine...

---

Date: 12 Jul 2009
Time: 04:52:22

Your Comments:

Ultimately, the "little horn" and "Beast" are Satan working with and through the sinful nature of man, whoever those men are, whether Rome, or Nero, or those Particular Jews involved. Paul says this is true of all in Ephesians 2:2 "Wherein in time past, ye walked according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience." So ultimately, the "beast" and "little horn" are a picture of the sinful nature at work. Therefore,beyond those things that happened historically, the destruction of these is a picture of the inward work of salvation wrought by Jesus Christ: "And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts" (Gal. 5:24), and "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be the Spirit of God dwell in you" (Rom. 8:9) and "If any man be in Christ he is a new creature: old things are passed away, behold, all things are made new." The destruction of these enemies of God is true for us in the sense that we ourselves were the "enemies of God," and our "old selves" were destroyed by faith in Christ.