Am I the only one that see's this???

[Michael J Loomis]

In this first passage Paul speaks to Timothy about Jesus' appearing as something future.

1 Timothy 6:13-15 I urge you in the sight of God who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus who witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate, that you keep this commandment without spot, blameless until our Lord Jesus Christ’s appearing, which He will manifest in His own time, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords,

In this second passage Paul speaks to Timothy about Jesus' appearing as something past.

2 Timothy 1:8-10 Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began, but has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

Notice also that Paul speaks about death having been abolished.

1 Corinthians 15:26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.

So am I crazy? Or is this saying what I think it is?

Pmike

[Once4all]

I always thought the "appearing" in 2 Timothy referred to his first appearing, but I've never viewed the two scriptures you posted side-by-side before. I need to ponder this awhile.

[adhitthana]

Feb 14, 2009 23:50:38 GMT -5 Michael J Loomis said:

So am I crazy? Or is this saying what I think it is?

Pmike

Good questions. There are two possibilities I see.

1. Paul wrote 2 Timothy after 70AD, while he was still imprisoned.

2. The appearing of Christ and the abolishing of death is something that takes place over a 40 year period, 30AD to 70AD, and so Paul writes of it as underway, or in the process of being fulifilled.

[Allyn]

Feb 14, 2009 23:50:38 GMT -5 Michael J Loomis said:

In this first passage Paul speaks to Timothy about Jesus' appearing as something future.

1 Timothy 6:13-15 I urge you in the sight of God who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus who witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate, that you keep this commandment without spot, blameless until our Lord Jesus Christ’s appearing, which He will manifest in His own time, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords,

In this second passage Paul speaks to Timothy about Jesus' appearing as something past.

2 Timothy 1:8-10 Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began, but has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

Notice also that Paul speaks about death having been abolished.

1 Corinthians 15:26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.

So am I crazy? Or is this saying what I think it is?

Pmike

Isn't this naturally speaking of 2 different activities? Christ at His coming came to redeem all mankind through the Gospel and that Gospel is still on going. But his Appearing being made known in His own good time was that of the parousia? I think so - but am I wrong?

[mellontes]

Feb 14, 2009 23:50:38 GMT -5 Michael J Loomis said:

In this first passage Paul speaks to Timothy about Jesus' appearing as something future.

1 Timothy 6:13-15 I urge you in the sight of God who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus who witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate, that you keep this commandment without spot, blameless until our Lord Jesus Christ’s appearing, which He will manifest in His own time, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords,

In this second passage Paul speaks to Timothy about Jesus' appearing as something past.

2 Timothy 1:8-10 Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began, but has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

Notice also that Paul speaks about death having been abolished.

1 Corinthians 15:26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.

So am I crazy? Or is this saying what I think it is?

Pmike

2 Timothy 1:1010 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:

Hopefully nobody around here thinks the aboishment of death has anything to do with people physically dying...

[Allyn]

2 Timothy 1:1010 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:

Hopefully nobody around here thinks the aboishment of death has anything to do with people physically dying...

Not I

[Michael J Loomis]

Feb 15, 2009 10:04:47 GMT -5 @mellontes said:

Hopefully nobody around here thinks the abolishment of death has anything to do with people physically dying...

Of course not. But consider what Paul has said in 2 Timothy in light of Matthew 24:14

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

Considering this verse is it possible that the gospel message had in some sense a specific message for that specific generation that would have had a terminal point, so that the end could come?

I guess what I'm trying to figure out is if Paul is essentially telling Timothy that the end that Jesus spoke of in Matthew 24 had come.

Consider again 1 Corinthians 15. This time 20 through 26.

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming. Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.

It would seem to me that Paul is saying in 2 Timothy 1 that 1 Corinthians 15 had been fulfilled before he wrote to Timothy the second time. That being the case, then we would have Paul himself and actual Biblical proof of an author of the New Testament saying that the end HAD COME. PAST TENSE!!!

If that is the case...THIS IS HUGE!

[Michael J Loomis]

By the way...I am keeping this conversation here for now. I'm hoping that we as full preterists can work this out and if need be shoot it down before I go and take this over to our friendly hyperfuturist friends.

[Allyn]

Feb 15, 2009 11:36:56 GMT -5 Michael J Loomis said:

Feb 15, 2009 10:04:47 GMT -5 @mellontes said:

Hopefully nobody around here thinks the abolishment of death has anything to do with people physically dying...

Of course not. But consider what Paul has said in 2 Timothy in light of Matthew 24:14

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

Considering this verse is it possible that the gospel message had in some sense a specific message for that specific generation that would have had a terminal point, so that the end could come?

I guess what I'm trying to figure out is if Paul is essentially telling Timothy that the end that Jesus spoke of in Matthew 24 had come.

Consider again 1 Corinthians 15. This time 20 through 26.

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming. Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.

It would seem to me that Paul is saying in 2 Timothy 1 that 1 Corinthians 15 had been fulfilled before he wrote to Timothy the second time. That being the case, then we would have Paul himself and actual Biblical proof of an author of the New Testament saying that the end HAD COME. PAST TENSE!!!

If that is the case...THIS IS HUGE!

Don't we already agree that the end had come? Not an end to life and civilization but as in that it was now turned over to God and even Christ is subject to him (1 Cor 15). Jesus accomplished the legal matter that put us at odds with God. But He also provided the way for all future generations so that upon death the access we have to God in life is fully realized at the end of our personal days.

[Michael J Loomis]

Feb 15, 2009 0:27:08 GMT -5 Once4all said:

I always thought the "appearing" in 2 Timothy referred to his first appearing, but I've never viewed the two scriptures you posted side-by-side before. I need to ponder this awhile.

I know most people would look at the 2 Timothy 1:8-10 passage as speaking of Jesus' first appearing, but this can't be in light of what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15. In 1 Corinthians...well after the cross, Paul speaks of the abolition of death as something still future. Yet in 2 Timothy he speaks of it as something past. Therefore an appearing of Christ would have had to have happened between 1 Corinthians 15 and 2 Timothy 1 that would have put an end to death.

Does this make sense???

[Michael J Loomis]

Feb 15, 2009 12:02:05 GMT -5 Allyn said:

Don't we already agree that the end had come? Not an end to life and civilization but as in that it was now turned over to God and even Christ is subject to him (1 Cor 15). Jesus accomplished the legal matter that put us at odds with God. But He also provided the way for all future generations so that upon death the access we have to God in life is fully realized at the end of our personal days.

Of course...But what I am trying to figure out is if this passage is being as clear as I think it is. I would love to think that I found a New Testament author stating that the so called second coming was a past event.

Pmike

[Allyn]

Feb 15, 2009 12:11:16 GMT -5 Michael J Loomis said:

Feb 15, 2009 12:02:05 GMT -5 Allyn said:

Don't we already agree that the end had come? Not an end to life and civilization but as in that it was now turned over to God and even Christ is subject to him (1 Cor 15). Jesus accomplished the legal matter that put us at odds with God. But He also provided the way for all future generations so that upon death the access we have to God in life is fully realized at the end of our personal days.

Of course...But what I am trying to figure out is if this passage is being as clear as I think it is. I would love to think that I found a New Testament author stating that the so called second coming was a past event.

Pmike

Well put your mind at ease because you have found exactly that.

[mtymousie]

When we read Paul's letters to Timothy, there are four references to the "appearing" of Jesus, only one of which appears (no pun intented) to be present tense.

Couple that with 3 references to "that day".

Consider: ""

In Matt.24, Jesus' disciples asked Him when "the end" would come. Consider: "6: And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

13: "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved."

I simply cannot see the idea that "the end" came before the return of Christ in 70 AD.

preteristmouse

[Michael J Loomis]

Feb 15, 2009 12:51:25 GMT -5 mtymousie said:

I simply cannot see the idea that "the end" came before the return of Christ in 70 AD.

preteristmouse

Funny that I should have to ask a full preterist to reconsider what is meant by "the end."

But what if the end that was in view was not speaking of the end as in the end of the fall or the temple...But simply the end of that old covenant age?

Do you at least see the point/connection that I am trying to make here Dale? If this is what I am thinking this is, we now have a New Testament author confirming full preterism.

[mellontes]

Feb 15, 2009 13:05:50 GMT -5 Michael J Loomis said:

But what if the end that was in view was not speaking of the end as in the end of the fall or the temple...But simply the end of that old covenant age?

Do you at least see the point/connection that I am trying to make here Dale? If this is what I am thinking this is, we now have a New Testament author confirming full preterism.

As much as I, too, would like to see that concept realized, I don't think I can go there. The new covenant age isn't fully realized until the old covenant age is completely gone. The new heavens and earth aren't fully realized until the old heaven and earth have passed away. Same for both Jerusalems.

I don't think "the end" referred to one special 24-hour day (not that anyone has specifically stated this either) but is rather a period of say 3 1/2 years??? Is it not the end times?

The Thessalonians in Paul's 2 letter were still awaiting the rest that would come at Christ's appearing (2 Thess 1:17). This to me is strong evidence against what you are trying to advocate. Paul was given the task or ordained function of spreading the gospel to the rest of the known world and he did before his death. The end would begin at that time. Now when did Paul die physically?

2 Timothy 1:11 (the verse after), seems to indicate that it was the GOSPEL that Paul had been given a charge over.

2 Timothy 1:8-10 are in the context of the GOSPEL (His first appearing [epiphany]).

2 Timothy 1:8-10 Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God;
9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,
10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:

2 Timothy 1:1111 Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

This can only refer to the GOSPEL of the original text.

Christ's first appearing brought the Light of the Truth; His second appearing would bring salvation because of the Light of the Truth.

The abolishing of death is probably a lot trickier to explain. These are questions not statements:

Wouldn't the death that was abolished at Calvary (gospel) be spiritual death caused by sin - available only in Christ?

Would n't the death that is to be destroyed (future) in 1 Corinthians 15 be that of the Hadean realm - the grave, the place where all went before CHrist made the way for the holy of holies to be open for us?

And then there is physical death...

[Allyn]

Since the title of this thread is open ended I want to use it as a place to ask this question concerning the thorn in the Apostle Paul's side. The Bible seems to never really make it clear what physical disability Paul had in which he asked God 3 times to remove, but much speculation has been made. I want to add my speculation.

As I was reading Galatians one day it came to my thinking that the problem Paul was dealing with was a visual problem. I don't think it was blindness but instead it was something that was bad enough that it affected him severely and that he spoke of it at least twice and maybe a third time. The second mention was possibly in Galatians 4.

12 Brethren, I urge you to become like me, for I became like you. You have not injured me at all. 13 You know that because of physical infirmity I preached the gospel to you at the first. 14 And my trial which was in my flesh you did not despise or reject, but you received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.

Here Paul makes mention that he had an infirmity and that the Galatians were aware of it. Then in verse 15 he says:

...For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me.

Why not say "pluck out you eyes" and leave "own" out of the sentence. He seems to emphasize "own" as if to be referring back to his infirmity.

Then we have this from Chapter 6:
11 See with what large letters I have written to you with my own hand!

The big letters may simply be to emphasize a point or it may be to illustrate that this was in his own hand and if vision was a problem then bigger letters would help him during his writing of the letter.

Is this a valid possibility?

[stephenpatrick]

Hi Allyn,

Thats as good of possible reason as any that I've heard of.
Good job.

Steve

[Allyn]

Hi Steve,

I have never heard of it speculated this way before, so as far as I know its original to me but I could be wrong. I think I will do a search on google and see.

[Allyn]

I find others have thought it was a vision problem.

[stephenpatrick]

Possibly something left over from his encounter with the Lord on the road to Damascus?

[Allyn]

Feb 15, 2009 15:27:26 GMT -5 stephenpatrick said:

Possibly something left over from his encounter with the Lord on the road to Damascus?

That's what I was thinking.

[Sower]

Feb 15, 2009 15:03:43 GMT -5 stephenpatrick said:

Hi Allyn,

Thats as good of possible reason as any that I've heard of.
Good job.

Steve

Agreed!

However, Paul said his thorn in the flesh was 'a messenger of satan' to buffet him. That reminds me of his warning to the Galatians, that if an angel from heaven or any man preach any other gospel than that which he dad preached, let him be accursed (Galatians 1:7-9).

There may have been false teachers following Paul and trying to pervert the gospel or add Judaism.

Paul mentioned Alexander the coppersmith, as one that had caused him much harm, and withstood his words (2 Timothy 4:14-18).

Just my thoughts.

Lady Sower~

[Sower]

Hi Psychohmike,

I'm still pondering your question!

Lady Sower~

[lorilee]

2 Timothy 1:8-10, "Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God; Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus beforer the world began, But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel."


Hey psychomike,
This thread is the reason I am now on this forum. My best friend found this site and read your post and said she wanted to read it to me to see what I thought. When you try to back preterism with dates of NT letters/books, or something written by Josephus, or any history book for that matter, opposers always say "Nothing outside of the Bible." So, to think that Paul was writing this 2nd letter to Timothy and saying that Christ had already appeared and abolished death, was soooo exciting. It sent me straight to the Word and that is always a good thing!!

But, then I came across the following verses and wondered, since you haven't posted anymore about this, if you read these as well? If not, what do you or anyone else think about them in relation to your original question/observation on this thread?

2 Timothy 2:16-18, "But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some."

2 Timothy 4:1, "Charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, Who shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom."

2 Timothy 4:8, "Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing."

Lori

[mellontes]

Mar 13, 2009 7:50:30 GMT -5 lorilee said:

2 Timothy 1:8-10, "Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God; Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus beforer the world began, But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel."


Hey psychomike,
This thread is the reason I am now on this forum. My best friend found this site and read your post and said she wanted to read it to me to see what I thought. When you try to back preterism with dates of NT letters/books, or something written by Josephus, or any history book for that matter, opposers always say "Nothing outside of the Bible." So, to think that Paul was writing this 2nd letter to Timothy and saying that Christ had already appeared and abolished death, was soooo exciting. It sent me straight to the Word and that is always a good thing!!

But, then I came across the following verses and wondered, since you haven't posted anymore about this, if you read these as well? If not, what do you or anyone else think about them in relation to your original question/observation on this thread?

2 Timothy 2:16-18, "But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some."

Obviously, I am not psychomike, but I do qualify for "anyone." This verse is good proof in the differences of the two events, although I am thoroughly convinced that 2 Timothy 1:10 is ONLY a Gospel related event as evidenced by the phrase "through the gospel." The thing about Philtus and Hymanaeus is that they got a little anxious and jumped the gun by a few years. I can well imagine that the Parousia event occupyied the thoughts of the Christians because the generation time stamp as prophesied by the Lord in Matthew 24:34 was nearing the end. Added to this, was the fact that every epistle talks of this event. With the expectancy of the Lord’s return constantly occupying the thoughts of men, this kind of error would have been quite plausible, but not excusable. Notice that Paul never questioned the nature of the resurrection.

Mar 13, 2009 7:50:30 GMT -5 lorilee said:

2 Timothy 4:1, "Charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, Who shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom."

Yep, another future verse for sure...

Mar 13, 2009 7:50:30 GMT -5 lorilee said:

2 Timothy 4:8, "Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing."

Strange you should mention this verse. I just had a discussion about this. This other fellow was placing this event at the time of Paul's death indicating strongly that "His appearing" occurs at the time of every believer's death. I would like to add another verse, this time, from the Apostle Peter:

2 Peter 1:16 - For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

The "we made known" part is definitely past tense. And since this constitutes the introduction of his letter before going on to explain end-time stuff, I would have say this is obviously referencing the first advent, just as it was in 2 Timothy 1:10.

Blessings!

[Once4all]

Mar 13, 2009 10:55:13 GMT -5 @mellontes said:

...
Strange you should mention this verse. I just had a discussion about this. This other fellow was placing this event at the time of Paul's death indicating strongly that "His appearing" occurs at the time of every believer's death.

This is something that continues to hover in my mind, a belief stubborn to go away. I place the individual appearings at each believer's death as perhaps starting after 70 A.D., but I suppose it could also have been the case between the cross and 70 A.D., as well.

Bev

[lorilee]

2 Peter 1:16, "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty."

The "we made known" part is definitely past tense. And since this constitutes the introduction of his letter before going on to explain end-time stuff, I would have say this is obviously referencing the first advent, just as it was in 2 Timothy 1:10.

Hey mellontes,
Thanks for your reply. I agree that 2 Peter 1:16 is talking about the first advent. Peter said "we were witnesses of His majesty" and if that was past tense in reference to Christ's second advent, all the believers would have been eyewitnesses and wouldn't have needed this to be "made known" to them by Peter:

Revelation 1:7, "Behold, He cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so. Amen."

Who knows how many or if any of the elect that Peter was writing 2 Peter to, had actually seen Jeus in person during His earthly ministry. Since Peter was an apostle and a witness to Jesus' ministry (Acts 1:21-22), he could and did make known the majesty of His first advent.

This is something that continues to hover in my mind, a belief stubborn to go away. I place the individual appearings at each believer's death as perhaps starting after 70 A.D., but I suppose it could also have been the case between the cross and 70 A.D., as well.

I have never heard or thought that there could be individual appearings at each believer's death? I could see how 2 Timothy 4:8 is referring to all the dead in Christ that were resurrected (Paul being one of them because he died before 70 AD) and then after that, any believer that dies goes to heaven and receives each their own crown of righteousness (I'm taking not a literal crown). I would love some scripture to back your thoughts about individual appearings, though.

Lori

[mellontes]

Mar 13, 2009 12:43:36 GMT -5 lorilee said:

Hey mellontes,

Thanks for your reply. I agree that 2 Peter 1:16 is talking about the first advent. Peter said "we were witnesses of His majesty" and if that was past tense in reference to Christ's second advent, all the believers would have been eyewitnesses and wouldn't have needed this to be "made known" to them by Peter:

Hold on here... the eyewitness to His majesty occurred at the transfiguration. The power and coming referred to His first advent.

Mar 13, 2009 12:26:34 GMT -5 Once4all said:

This is something that continues to hover in my mind, a belief stubborn to go away. I place the individual appearings at each believer's death as perhaps starting after 70 A.D., but I suppose it could also have been the case between the cross and 70 A.D., as well.

Mar 13, 2009 12:43:36 GMT -5 lorilee said:

I have never heard or thought that there could be individual appearings at each believer's death? I could see how 2 Timothy 4:8 is referring to all the dead in Christ that were resurrected (Paul being one of them because he died before 70 AD) and then after that, any believer that dies goes to heaven and receives each their own crown of righteousness (I'm taking not a literal crown). I would love some scripture to back your thoughts about individual appearings, though.

Lori

That's my take on things too, Lori. I asked that gentlemen how he differentiated His second appearing Parousia event with Matthew 24:3's Parousia event that necessitated certain historical events to transpire BEFORE that Parousia event. I am certain that at least one person died before this.

[lorilee]

Hold on here... the eyewitness to His majesty occurred at the transfiguration. The power and coming referred to His first advent.

If so, then the "eyewitnesses" whom Peter is speaking of is himself, James and John in 1 Peter 1:16....yes? I guess it would be safe to interpret "his majesty" as being what occurred at the transfiguration. I see what your saying about distinguishing the difference between the power and coming and the majesty. Thanks for pointing that out to me.

Lori

[mellontes]

Mar 13, 2009 15:47:00 GMT -5 lorilee said:

Hold on here... the eyewitness to His majesty occurred at the transfiguration. The power and coming referred to His first advent.

If so, then the "eyewitnesses" whom Peter is speaking of is himself, James and John in 1 Peter 1:16....yes? I guess it would be safe to interpret "his majesty" as being what occurred at the transfiguration. I see what your saying about distinguishing the difference between the power and coming and the majesty. Thanks for pointing that out to me.

Lori

No problem. If it wasn't for posts just such as these I wouldn't have noticed it either. It has been a fairly recent "discovery."