You never answered my question. In your view are the OT saints still sleeping?
The absurdity and heresy of Preterism
- Thread starter Nehemiah6
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
(Full Preterism) is heretical.
Another Doctrine!
1.) You deny a future return of Jesus Christ to earth
2.) You deny the future glorified body of the believer and the future Last Day resurrection
3.) You deny a future New Heaven and Earth
If you don't know, just say you don't know. You don't have to keep inferring that I'm a heretic. SMH
John 12:17KJV
17 The people therefore that was with him when he called Lazarus out of his grave, and raised him from the dead, bare record.
(Full Preterism) is heretical, just as universalism is heretical.
Full Preterism Is Another Doctrine!
1.) You deny a future return of Jesus Christ to earth?
2.) You deny the future glorified body of the believer and the future Last Day resurrection?
3.) You deny a future New Heaven and Earth?
There are two phrases that describe two different things. I haven’t studied it thoroughly, but the two phrases are:
The resurrection of the dead vs the resurrection from the dead.
No, they are identical 146. Luke and Matthew are the exact same conversation but Luke calls it the resurrection FROM THE DEAD and Matthew calls it the RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD.
(Luk 20:33) Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife.
(Luk 20:34) And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
(Luk 20:35) But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
Mat 22:28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
Mat 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
Mat 22:31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
That was the resurrection of Lazarus dead body, it was not the resurrection of Lazarus.
Hi John!
Those two phrases mean the same exact thing. Of and From are just two prepositions which convey the same meaning
* So will it be with the resurrection of the dead: What is sown is perishable; it is raised imperishable.
* and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by His resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.
(1Co 15:42) So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
"It" is sown in this earthly body of corruption.
"It" is raised in an incorruptible body.
(1Co 15:43) It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
"It" is sown in this earthly body of dishonor.
"It" is raised in the glory of the new body.
"It" is sown in the weakness of this body.
"It" is raised in the power of the new body.
(1Co 15:44) It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
"It" is sown in the form of a natural body..
"It" is raised in the form of a spiritual body.
What is "it"?
"It" is sown in this earthly body of corruption.
"It" is raised in an incorruptible body.
(1Co 15:43) It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
"It" is sown in this earthly body of dishonor.
"It" is raised in the glory of the new body.
"It" is sown in the weakness of this body.
"It" is raised in the power of the new body.
(1Co 15:44) It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
"It" is sown in the form of a natural body..
"It" is raised in the form of a spiritual body.
What is "it"?
Unless you can quote KJV1611 making the above statements, you're the one causing problems here.
I'll save him some trouble. I don't believe that any of things he mentioned are future.
Good points and I never even considered that angle at all. It is truly amazing how everything lines up so well in truth. The way some divide over these issues so pigheadedly is honestly shocking sometimes, and to make it not only a matter of salvation, but the grounds on which you cut people off and disassociate with them as if they can't be saved is not only dangerously close minded and foolish, it is exactly the kind of thing Jesus attacked the Pharisees for. Paul too, like the matter of circumcision when he said he wished they'd go the whole way and cut it all the way offWell done Jim. I'm really starting to like you, in a brotherly way of course
Can I add one thing along your theme? Paul wrote to the Thessalonians to comfort them through all the persecutions they were enduring at the hands of disbelieving Jews around them. Paul promised them rest when Jesus returned in flaming vengeance. But if you listen to these futurists, the Thessalonians were out of luck, up the creek without a paddle, no rest for the weary, sorry boys. The beatings will continue until moral improves. These futurists actually have stolen this comfort and taken it for themselves as if Paul was writing to them.
Oh and in the Olivet the disciples weren't going to get beaten and hauled into synagogues and before kings and the HS wasn't going to give them any words to say, that also was stolen by the futurists for themselves.
over the Jews just trying to carry over tradition. Imagine trying to add a whole new made up requirement. 
I wouldn't want to be found wrong in that matter.
Specifically this arrogant phrase. "We alone harmonize with the word. Us pretribs with our bibles" I couldn't disagree more. It wasn't to be ugly, but to let you know I strongly disagree with what you said. Fair enough?
Well never mind then... if you don't believe the bridegroom is prophetic of Jesus, there would be no point in me going further.
What do you mean??? Of course I believe the Bride groom was Jesus. He married His Church, when He returned in the 66-70 AD time frame. He has been ruling the nations with an iron rod ever since Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire. Although now I wonder if Satan has been set loose. See, I'm not a full preterist. Mostly full with a nugget or two left remaining.
Good points and I never even considered that angle at all. It is truly amazing how everything lines up so well in truth. The way some divide over these issues so pigheadedly is honestly shocking sometimes, and to make it not only a matter of salvation, but the grounds on which you cut people off and disassociate with them as if they can't be saved is not only dangerously close minded and foolish, it is exactly the kind of thing Jesus attacked the Pharisees for. Paul too, like the matter of circumcision when he said he wished they'd go the whole way and cut it all the way off
Well said my friend in Christ!!!! Great observations and thanks for reminding me of what's really important, the great command Christ gave to His disciples was to Love One Another>>>> Just love each other. I do love my futurists brothers. They are whacked out of their minds with this rapture stuff, but I still love them as brothers in Christ just as I love my real brother who is whacked out of his mind with all kinds of things. Pat Buchanan was a screaming communist to him, far too left to vote for, LOL.