Comments on: You might be a preterist if… http://undeception.com/you-might-be-a-preterist-if/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=you-might-be-a-preterist-if By faith, Abraham... Fri, 30 Jul 2010 01:03:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: preteristheresy http://undeception.com/you-might-be-a-preterist-if/comment-page-1/#comment-29 preteristheresy Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:27:36 +0000 http://undeception.com/?p=10#comment-29 WHAT? Revelation is about the revealing of the removal of sin and death (not the removal itself), and the revealing of life in his kingdom (not that the event gave eternal life ). Sin and death is the issue, and can not be destroyed or removed by historical events. This removal or posession can not be a past or future event tied to historical events. Meaning the destruction of Jerusalem did not place you in the new covenant, nor did it remove your sin, death or seperation from God. If it did, there would be no reason to be born again. You were or have been in bondage to the flesh (covenant of death represented by the Mosiac Covenant) and if you are in Christ, you have been born again to the New Covenant of the Spirit. How is this process a past event, how did the old pass in 70ad, when you died to the old by being born again. http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/ WHAT? Revelation is about the revealing of the removal of sin and death (not the removal itself), and the revealing of life in his kingdom (not that the event gave eternal life ). Sin and death is the issue, and can not be destroyed or removed by historical events. This removal or posession can not be a past or future event tied to historical events. Meaning the destruction of Jerusalem did not place you in the new covenant, nor did it remove your sin, death or seperation from God. If it did, there would be no reason to be born again. You were or have been in bondage to the flesh (covenant of death represented by the Mosiac Covenant) and if you are in Christ, you have been born again to the New Covenant of the Spirit. How is this process a past event, how did the old pass in 70ad, when you died to the old by being born again.

http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/

]]> By: Steve http://undeception.com/you-might-be-a-preterist-if/comment-page-1/#comment-28 Steve Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:53:14 +0000 http://undeception.com/?p=10#comment-28 Turn that gun around on yourself: does your view have new scriptures being appended to the Bible stating the fulfillment of Revelation after the events take place <em>in the future</em>? Where does Scripture obligate itself to do so? Turn that gun around on yourself: does your view have new scriptures being appended to the Bible stating the fulfillment of Revelation after the events take place in the future? Where does Scripture obligate itself to do so?

]]> By: preteristheresy http://undeception.com/you-might-be-a-preterist-if/comment-page-1/#comment-27 preteristheresy Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:41:56 +0000 http://undeception.com/?p=10#comment-27 Yes, I do agree that the entire NT was written before AD70. SO WHAT? In my view, it does not matter, becuase the book is not about the shadows of historical and temporal events. It is the reason why there is no inspired writter to record these things as a past historical event that I question. Why is there silence? Is this by God's design becuase it really has NOTHING to do with historical events or time. But used shadows and images to point to the eternal and unseen. Why is God silent when it comes to saying something is Past. Why does God not reveal himself as a Preterist "a god of the past"? If he wanted to do so, it would have been part of his plan revealed through his Spirit. I don't understand why this is not a bigger deal among preterist since their entire system is a deduction, unscriptural (not one passage says IT HAPPENED). Is this how God operates? Oh I see, this what FAITH really means. http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/ Yes, I do agree that the entire NT was written before AD70. SO WHAT? In my view, it does not matter, becuase the book is not about the shadows of historical and temporal events.

It is the reason why there is no inspired writter to record these things as a past historical event that I question. Why is there silence? Is this by God’s design becuase it really has NOTHING to do with historical events or time. But used shadows and images to point to the eternal and unseen. Why is God silent when it comes to saying something is Past. Why does God not reveal himself as a Preterist “a god of the past”? If he wanted to do so, it would have been part of his plan revealed through his Spirit.

I don’t understand why this is not a bigger deal among preterist since their entire system is a deduction, unscriptural (not one passage says IT HAPPENED).
Is this how God operates? Oh I see, this what FAITH really means.

http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/

]]> By: Steve http://undeception.com/you-might-be-a-preterist-if/comment-page-1/#comment-26 Steve Sat, 15 Dec 2007 18:27:51 +0000 http://undeception.com/?p=10#comment-26 I was thinking the same thing, Mike! :D I was thinking the same thing, Mike! :D

]]> By: Mike Beidler http://undeception.com/you-might-be-a-preterist-if/comment-page-1/#comment-25 Mike Beidler Sat, 15 Dec 2007 08:31:53 +0000 http://undeception.com/?p=10#comment-25 <i>not one verse claims the Parousia, resurection, Age to Come, or the New Heavens and earth, appeared or came PAST TENSE, in 70ad.</i> That makes sense, but only because the entire NT was written <i>before</i> AD 70. :) not one verse claims the Parousia, resurection, Age to Come, or the New Heavens and earth, appeared or came PAST TENSE, in 70ad.

That makes sense, but only because the entire NT was written before AD 70. :)

]]>