The absurdity and heresy of Preterism

(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

You never answered my question. In your view are the OT saints still sleeping?

(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

Resurrected/raised from the dead.

Those resurrected ones are in fact raised from the dead.

Ok,why do you NEED a distiction????

Time will tell

If you don't know, just say you don't know. You don't have to keep inferring that I'm a heretic. SMH

Exactly and thank you 146 because this is something I have been trying to understand. When Jesus is talking about the resurrection of the DEAD in John 11, he isn't referring to the death of the body, he is talking about those that are dead in their sin and trespasses. The OT saints were still dead in their sins and trespasses when Jesus said this because Jesus had not payed the penalty for them yet. Is this correct in your view?

(Joh 11:24) Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.
(Joh 11:25) Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:
(Joh 11:26) And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

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.

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.

The resurrection of Lazarus.

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,

Matthew is to a Jewish audience and Luke is directed to a Gentile audience.

(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

Unless you can quote KJV1611 making the above statements, you're the one causing problems here.

Well 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.

Ok mr red x

Tell me what in the world you find incorrect

Well never mind then... if you don't believe the bridegroom is prophetic of Jesus, there would be no point in me going further.

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 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.