The absurdity and heresy of Preterism

[Truth7t7]

That is not what Romans 4:5 is saying correct?

Unless you are one of those who define keeping commandments as part of believing, instead of a work?

You have taken this way out in left field

 

[Guojing]

You have taken this way out in left field

Rev 14:12 says one must have the faith of Jesus and keep the commandments. In context, one must not take the mark of the beast.

That is not faith and works to you?

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Then how come there are so many different thoughts by those who have turned to Jesus if Jesus is the one opening up all our minds?

Because people turn away from the Lord Jesus Christ and follow men. Read 1 Cor 1 - 3.

Here are some of the verses within that section of Scripture which reveal the problem:


What God wants:

1 Corinthians 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.


What we do:

1 Corinthians 1:

11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

...

1 Corinthians 3:

3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

(I don’t question that He does or can, just that it’s automatic as you suggest.)

Where have I ever suggested anything is "automatic"???


Some of the "different thoughts" have to do with where we are in our walk (life) with the Lord. We are to grow up in Christ ... mature spiritually. This takes time ... just as it takes time for an infant to mature into toddler ... child ... adolescent ... adult. That is one area where we see "different thoughts".


Another area where we see "different thoughts" is when believers follow men rather than the Lord Jesus Christ. Just as the pharisees were so irate with Jesus and His disciples because the pharisees followed the commandments of men.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

No one suffers today what the members of those churches did all the while watching the fledging church was being desimated. This you forget.

How do you know "no one suffers today what the members of those churches did"? You don't look at the atrocities which abound in our day and time because you "find it so disgusting that [you] do not look into it if [you] don't have to do so".

https://www.raymondibrahim.com/category/muslim-persecution-of-christians/reports/

I’ve never heard that the letters to the church are a comfort to these. Other verses? Yes. Revelation? No.

Really??? Too bad for you. There is comfort, encouragement, praise and worship in the Book of Revelation. Sorry you won't see it.

I don’t think see evidence that the timeframe you insist upon is God’s timeframe.

I have already provided you with Scripture. That you choose not to see does not mean God did not provide the comfort and encouragement for those who lived/live beyond the timeframe you allow.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Proofs are pertaining to mathematics and alcohol. Faith is evidence based.

Well, aren't you cute with your quips. Not only full of quips, but you change the narrative every time you are unable to refute the central point.

You claim to be able to "find a link that goes through the events in Revelation that fits the descriptions of what happened at that time in Judea" but you don't want to provide those proof texts because you " do not look into it if [you] don't have to do so".

Then when your absurd non-response is pointed out, you resort to (not) cute quips and change the narrative (and probably still will not provide "a link that goes through the events in Revelation that fits the descriptions of what happened at that time in Judea".

There’s no proof Jesus rose from the dead.

Eyewitness accounts are the best "proof":

1 Corinthians 15:

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

I asked for the personal benefit you derived from one bit. Not everything applies to everyone.

More of your changing the narrative because you cannot refute the central point. You did not ask "for the personal benefit [ I ] derived from one bit".

Here is the discussion:

Me: You then stated "My position is it was for them and they understood. Ephesus was for sure meant as what was threatened came to pass" in Post #981.

I replied in Post #988 that "By insinuating that the writing could only benefit the specific church mentioned and that no other church can learn and benefit from the instruction except that church is not proper understanding of the purpose of Scripture."

You: Let's see how this works in applying it in real life. What does the letter to Ephesus in Revelation tell your church that they responded to in real life differently than the letter Paul wrote to Ephesus which threatened no action if the church did not comply?

Me: Why don't you go and explain to believers whose family members have been slaughtered that they have no need of what John wrote to the churches in Rev 2-3 ... that they do not need to hear to him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God(Rev 2:7) because, you know, that really wasn't written to you ...

You: There is a difference between one family member being killed for their faith and the whole of the church in the world being killed. And every family of believers who experiences one being killed comforts themselves with the scripture. And you snatch one verse out of many.

Me: I did not "snatch one verse out of many". I showed you that your insistence that what is written to the churches in Rev 2-3 benefits believers who live beyond the timeframe you allow.

You: I asked for the personal benefit you derived from one bit.


You are unable to sustain your claim that what John wrote in Revelation was written only to those believers you have decided in your own mind are benefitted by the writing.

You deny there is any reason in our day and time (and in the future) to receive any benefit from what is written to the churches in Revelation.

You are wrong. Quit changing the narrative because you refuse to admit that believers today and in the future can receive comfort and encouragement from what John wrote to the churches in Revelation.

That was not the verse O gave you. You picked one you like better instead.

more of your nonsense. you just don't like the fact that what was done with "the verse O gave [me]" ended up fulfilling prophecy.

So? What does that have to with this?

you stated: "I bet you have not heard a sermon where the pastor read one of the letters to a church in revelation, say Thyatira, and say that all those words are written to them and they need to weed you Jezebel as well and identify some in the church who hold to the deep teachings of Satan. From reading your post, I would think that you would expect all those letters to apply to your church at one time or another and the appropriate action ought to be taken."

I replied: "Have you not read the words of Jesus when He taught about the wheat and the tares? In the world, as well as in our churches, there are tares among the what. The tares are not true believers. The wheat is the true believers. Jesus said let both grow together."

Sometimes the "appropriate action" is to allow the wheat and the tares to grow together and let God sort it out at the proper time.

That’s not inspired scripture. But did your church, not some guy not in your fellowship do this?

Again you miss the point.

What was quoted was from Charles Spurgeon:

“Magistrates and churches may remove the openly wicked from their society; the outwardly good who are inwardly worthless they must leave; for the judging of hearts is beyond their sphere.” (Spurgeon)​

The point of Mr. Spurgeon was the same point Jesus made concerning the wheat and the tares.

What can I say? You think everything written there is equally for everyone,I guess, although I’m 100% sure if I presented you with some very unpleasant words from Revelation you’d deny they’re for you.

More of your absurd nonsense.

Just because I allow believers alive today (and future believers) to derive comfort and encouragement from what John wrote to the churches does not mean I "think everything written there is equally for everyone".

Please tell us what events revealed in the Book of Revelation have already taken place and what events are yet future.

The temple has been trampled on and destroyed.

That's it??? Then why do you insist that what John wrote to the churches in Rev 2-3 does not provide comfort and encouragement to believers who are living today?

And does this mean that you believe everything else written in the Book of Revelation is yet future???

The word Jesus chose is near. That you don’t like it doesn’t mean I have to justify HIS choice of words. You can believe HIM or deny HIM. He said NEAR to them.
Can’t fancy Greek footwork your way out of near?

Again, the fact that 1900+ years has passed since Jesus said it was NEAR to them, perhaps you need to come to more perfect understanding of what is the meaning of the word ἐγγὺς (engys).

 

[Truth7t7]

Rev 14:12 says one must have the faith of Jesus and keep the commandments. In context, one must not take the mark of the beast.

That is not faith and works to you?

Your claim is false and adding to the scripture.

No place in Revelation 14:12 below is the word "Must" used, I'm out on further response regarding Rev 14:12

Revelation 14:12KJV
12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

 

[Guojing]

Your claim is false and adding to the scripture.

No place in Revelation 14:12 below is the word "Must" used, I'm out on further response regarding Rev 14:12

Revelation 14:12KJV
12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

So you can understand why there are people who regard Hebrews to Revelations as Tribulation doctrine.

You don't get Paul's gospel of grace, where you are saved apart from works of the law, spelt out explicitly in those books.

Instead, together with Rev 14:12, you get verses in Hebrews to Rev that goes

James 2: 24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

1 John 3
6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.

7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

You try to find a passage in those books that repeated clearly what Paul was saying in Romans 4:5, and you will realized, there is none.

 

[Ahwatukee]

You, like me, still carry some dispensational baggage.

AD 70 was the wrath of God. The time when Christ died on the cross was great tribulation.

Man, I say this in all truthfulness, but you need to reevaluate your understanding of the scriptures! Christ dying on the cross does not fit the criteria of what He said regarding the great tribulation period. His death was no doubt a terrible thing to go through in the flesh, but it does not satisfy what Jesus said regarding that great tribulation period. You are grasping not even at straws here! It is a total disregard of the information contained in the context. You remind me of 'the liar' skit on Saturday Night live where he makes up things and follows with "Yeah, that's the ticket!" Let me show you the multiple errors in that scripture which destroys the idea of Jesus being crucified as representing the great tribulation:

"So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination of desolation,’ described by the prophet Daniel (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the housetop come down to retrieve anything from his house. And let no one in the field return for his cloak."

How miserable those days will be for pregnant and nursing mothers! Pray that your flight will not occur in the winter or on the Sabbath. For at that time there will be great tribulation, unmatched from the beginning of the world until now, and never to be seen again. If those days had not been cut short, nobody would be saved. But for the sake of the elect, those days will be cut short."

So, the characteristics of the great tribulation are as follows:

* The setting up of the abomination

* The result being those in Judea fleeing to the mountains, without going to their house or from the field to get anything

* Those days will be miserable for pregnant woman and nursing mothers

* Great tribulation unmatched from the beginning of the world until now and never to be equaled again

* Pray that your flight will not occur in the winter or on the Sabbath?

* If the days were allowed to go on any longer, no one on the earth would survive

Now, you said that Jesus dying on the cross was the great tribulation. Why would people of Judea need to flee to the mountains and not return from the field to get his cloak or retrieve anything out of his house?

Why would Jesus' crucifixion be a warning to pregnant women and nursing mothers?

Why would pregnant and nursing mothers need to pray that their fleeing not take place in the winter or on the Sabbath?

Why would Jesus crucifixion be a reason for nobody on earth to be alive if those days were allowed to continue?

As you can see by the criteria of the context, Jesus' crucifixion cannot be the fulfillment of the great tribulation.

The great tribulation is marked by the ceasing of the sacrifices and offerings and the setting up of that abomination, which by the way will be set up in the holy place, which is the room just outside the holy of holies. How does that fit in with Jesus' crucifixion as being the great tribulation? Your claim just does not fit any of the criteria. The great tribulation is when that abomination will be set up in the temple, which is also when that antichrist will stand in the temple proclaiming himself to be God or anything that is worshiped. It is this same time when the beast will make war and conquer the great tribulation saints. And is the same time when the woman/Israel will flee out into the wilderness to that place that God will have prepared for her where she will be cared for during the last 1260 days which is when the Lord will return to the earth to end the age.

The tribulation/great tribulation is aptly named that because of the severity and magnitude of the seals, trumpets and bowl judgments and their resulting fatalities.

 

[DorothyMae]

How do you know "no one suffers today what the members of those churches did"? You don't look at the atrocities which abound in our day and time because you "find it so disgusting that [you] do not look into it if [you] don't have to do so".

Wow, the personal insults come out when your theology is challenged. Tells me something of your theology. You would have to read the events before 70 AD in Jerusalem in order to undertsand the comparison.

Really??? Too bad for you. There is comfort, encouragement, praise and worship in the Book of Revelation. Sorry you won't see it.

Please show me where the letters to the churches are a comfort to you besides "behold I stand at the door and knock." I did not say any of the book, I refered to those letters.

I have already provided you with Scripture.

None wherea time table is mentioned. YOU insist that what you think the timetable is, IS what God's time table is.

Well, aren't you cute with your quips. Not only full of quips, but you change the narrative every time you are unable to refute the central point.

I am not bring cute. I work in science and for us, proof is only found in mathematics. There is literally no proof that God is there or Jesus rose from the dead. Christians ought to know this. There is evidence, not proof.

Eyewitness accounts are the best "proof":

1 Corinthians 15:

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

Sigh! Eye witness accounts in a court of law are not proof. They just are not. They provide evidence, not proof.

More of your changing the narrative because you cannot refute the central point. You did not ask "for the personal benefit [ I ] derived from one bit".

Here is the discussion:

Me: You then stated "My position is it was for them and they understood. Ephesus was for sure meant as what was threatened came to pass" in Post #981.

I replied in Post #988 that "By insinuating that the writing could only benefit the specific church mentioned and that no other church can learn and benefit from the instruction except that church is not proper understanding of the purpose of Scripture."

You, by the way, avoid the whole point I made. Jesus threatened Ephesus with coming if they did not comply and you ignore this altogehter deviating the discussion to what others get out of that letter. What does that have to do with Jesus using the language of his coming and did not seem to think it is a problem with his coming again later.

You: Let's see how this works in applying it in real life. What does the letter to Ephesus in Revelation tell your church that they responded to in real life differently than the letter Paul wrote to Ephesus which threatened no action if the church did not comply?

Me: Why don't you go and explain to believers whose family members have been slaughtered that they have no need of what John wrote to the churches in Rev 2-3 ... that they do not need to hear to him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God(Rev 2:7) because, you know, that really wasn't written to you ...

Same thing. You cannot answer the question and so you deviation into the future. What does that have to do with my question?

You: There is a difference between one family member being killed for their faith and the whole of the church in the world being killed. And every family of believers who experiences one being killed comforts themselves with the scripture. And you snatch one verse out of many.

Me: I did not "snatch one verse out of many". I showed you that your insistence that what is written to the churches in Rev 2-3 benefits believers who live beyond the timeframe you allow.

You: I asked for the personal benefit you derived from one bit.


You are unable to sustain your claim that what John wrote in Revelation was written only to those believers you have decided in your own mind are benefitted by the writing.

You cannot answer the point that JEsus said he would come. And in fact, he did as he promised. This you cannot answer and so throw up sand.

You deny there is any reason in our day and time (and in the future) to receive any benefit from what is written to the churches in Revelation.

Never said any such thing. The letters written to the churches were written to that church and you cannot supply a single example of the letter to Thy~that applies to your church today. Not one. YOu said it is a comfort and yet when asked how, you cannot answer.

You are wrong. Quit changing the narrative because you refuse to admit that believers today and in the future can receive comfort and encouragement from what John wrote to the churches in Revelation.

Start telling me the comfort that letter to that church has given your church.

more of your nonsense. you just don't like the fact that what was done with "the verse O gave [me]" ended up fulfilling prophecy.


you stated: "I bet you have not heard a sermon where the pastor read one of the letters to a church in revelation, say Thyatira, and say that all those words are written to them and they need to weed you Jezebel as well and identify some in the church who hold to the deep teachings of Satan. From reading your post, I would think that you would expect all those letters to apply to your church at one time or another and the appropriate action ought to be taken."

I replied: "Have you not read the words of Jesus when He taught about the wheat and the tares? In the world, as well as in our churches, there are tares among the what. The tares are not true believers. The wheat is the true believers. Jesus said let both grow together."

More sand. You cannot answer my point and run to something else instead.

Sometimes the "appropriate action" is to allow the wheat and the tares to grow together and let God sort it out at the proper time.

That is 100% defiance of what Jesus told them to do so I guess we can conclude that that letter is never read in your church as a letter to them.

Just because I allow believers alive today (and future believers) to derive comfort and encouragement from what John wrote to the churches does not mean I "think everything written there is equally for everyone".

Sure sounds like it. When I say those letters in REvelation offer no comfort to us you do not allow this to be a valid point if I have it.

That's it??? Then why do you insist that what John wrote to the churches in Rev 2-3 does not provide comfort and encouragement to believers who are living today?

Because I ask you what and you cannot answer but need to go to a different verse instead.

And does this mean that you believe everything else written in the Book of Revelation is yet future???

NO.

Again, the fact that 1900+ years has passed since Jesus said it was NEAR to them, perhaps you need to come to more perfect understanding of what is the meaning of the word ἐγγὺς (engys).

Actually you need to figure out what near means. I know what it means, same as soon. Again you have no fancy adjusting the meaning because the Greek "near" can also mean....um......um.......really away but when it starts it will be near. (Yes that is a cheeky answer.)

 

[DorothyMae]

Because people turn away from the Lord Jesus Christ and follow men. Read 1 Cor 1 - 3.

So who is responsible for people turning away from the Lord, the believer or the Lord who has been charged with all the work if sanctification?

Here are some of the verses within that section of Scripture which reveal the problem:


What God wants:

1 Corinthians 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.


What we do:

1 Corinthians 1:

11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

...

1 Corinthians 3:

3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

Who is responsible for this occurring? Be careful because if you say you are, then you are dangerously close to WORKS. But if you answer God is, this begs the question as how He could fail.

Where have I ever suggested anything is "automatic"???

Who is doing this?

Some of the "different thoughts" have to do with where we are in our walk (life) with the Lord. We are to grow up in Christ ... mature spiritually. This takes time ... just as it takes time for an infant to mature into toddler ... child ... adolescent ... adult. That is one area where we see "different thoughts".

This is a good thought and I agree. Although some don’t grow at all. Ticks if the clock don’t guarantee growth. Some actually shrink.

Another area where we see "different thoughts" is when believers follow men rather than the Lord Jesus Christ. Just as the pharisees were so irate with Jesus and His disciples because the pharisees followed the commandments of men.

See above. Who is responsible for this?

We likely think more alike than I’m giving us credit for. Thanks for your post.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Dispensationalist are SCREWED up big time! They believe there are four or five different gospels and each gospel applies to a specific group of people at a specific time.

This is total nonsense. Dispensationalists believe that there is only one Gospel. If you are referring to Hyper- or Ultra-Dispensationalists, they are a disgrace since they fail to interpret Scripture correctly.

 

[KJV1611]

Did they come with Him? So many holes...

Mat 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Mat 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Jesus went to where they were, he returned to earth and brought them back with him. So yes they came with him.

 

[John146]

There’s never been a time in history when there weren’t wars and rumors of wars, it’s part of life on earth. And the Jewish nation did rise up against the Christian nation and tried to annihilate them. And the Roman nation rose up against the Jews and annihilated them and according to the book of Joel the northern army came against the Jews.

But none of that is nearly as important as the fact that Jesus was talking to Peter and James and John and Andrew. THEY were the ones that were going to be delivered up to the councils and be beaten in the synagogues.

How do you take something so blatantly obvious and twist it into a dispensational fantasy?

Do you know what the word you means.... it ain’t you or me or anyone living 2000 years later. You was Peter and James and John and Andrew. You know, the ones of THAT GENERATION.

The Jews were not a nation nor a kingdom. Rome was in total command. The book of Joel has not been fulfilled. And there was no Christian nation, only a few thousand converts.

 

[John146]

Mat 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Mat 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Jesus went to where they were, he returned to earth and brought them back with him. So yes they came with him.

Lol, these aren’t angels.

 

[KJV1611]

Gospel means good news.

Did God reveal the same exact good news throughout OT and NT?

Yes, Abraham BELIEVED GOD and it was counted to him as righteousness. The CHURCH was in the wilderness with the children of Israel.

Act 7:37 This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.
Act 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

 

[KJV1611]

You accuse another of twisting something that is blatantly obvious, when you yourself are guilty of the same.

In post #1417 You openly deny that the holy bible shows any evidence of a "Second Coming" of Jesus Christ including the verses below.

Matthew 24:29-31KJV
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

The resurrection was the SECOND COMING of Christ. He came first to Mary, then he left and went to hell, then returned back to earth in all power and glory. Now could you provide biblical evidence that 1) Jesus didn't leave the earth and return at his resurrection and 2) When he returned, he didn't return with all power and glory. 3) The resurrected saints ARE NOT a cloud of witnesses.

You show me bible verses like that and I'll agree with you.

 

[KJV1611]

How do you categorize the two witnesses of revelation 11? Who are they what is their identity?

I asked because as I'm keeping score you said that:
-King David was a priest
-Moses was a Christian
-Christians are Israelites

Here's what we know.

(Rev 11:4) These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

That is a reference to this.

(Zec 4:5) Then the angel that talked with me answered and said unto me, Knowest thou not what these be? And I said, No, my lord.
(Zec 4:6) Then he answered and spake unto me, saying, This is the word of the LORD unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts.

Zechariah asks who are these two olive trees. The angel answered and said "These ARE the WORD OF THE LORD which says Not by might, nor by power but by my spirit."

The two witnesses are the Old Testament and the New Testament but since the bible DOESN'T DIE, it has to be the word of the Lord in a believer. I think the saints resurrected with Christ fit that bill.

 

[KJV1611]

This is total nonsense. Dispensationalists believe that there is only one Gospel. If you are referring to Hyper- or Ultra-Dispensationalists, they are a disgrace since they fail to interpret Scripture correctly.

They're are at least two people on this thread that believe in multiple gospels.

 

[KJV1611]

The Jews were not a nation nor a kingdom. Rome was in total command. The book of Joel has not been fulfilled. And there was no Christian nation, only a few thousand converts.

146 Christ was in the CHURCH in the wilderness... do you not believe that?

 

[KJV1611]

Lol, these aren’t angels.

The word angel means messenger, they can be angelic realm messenger or human messengers.

 

[KJV1611]

You accuse another of twisting something that is blatantly obvious, when you yourself are guilty of the same.

In post #1417 You openly deny that the holy bible shows any evidence of a "Second Coming" of Jesus Christ including the verses below.

Matthew 24:29-31KJV
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

I think I've already answered this. Jesus died, left this earth, went to hell. He return back to this earth at the resurrection in all power and glory.