The Cross of Christ and Preterism

[kangaroojack]

didymus said:

Now the high priest went in to the holy of holies year after year with blood not his own. But Christ went in to the presence of God with His own blood. And because Christ was a perfect sacrifice, He did not have to go into the Holy of Holies year after year, for if He did , as the text tells us, He would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world.

Hi didymus,

Are you saying that Christ completed the atonement post-cross after all?

Roo

[kangaroojack]

didymus said:

The sequence of event goes like this, starting with the crucifixion. Christ was crucified, he was buried, and somewhere he was raised from the dead. Then he spent 40 days with His disciples, and of course, the Marys. He continued to teach them about the kingdom. Then He ascended into heaven to carry out His duty as a the High Priest, and in the presence of God the Father did the spiritual cleansing and purification, just as Roo has been telling us. But, who did he do this for? Not Himself. He did this as intercessor "for us." Or, to be more precise, for His bride. And when the temple was destroyed, that was a sign that God had finalized His divorce from Israel. Then, immediately after the tribulation of those days, Christ came to comsumate His marriage to His bride. And God the Father gave eternal life as a wedding gift. And then in Rev. 21.9, the best man introduced the bride to John as the wife of the lamb. Thus the marriage to the lamb was consumated in 70AD. You might say, from the ascension to 70AD was the betrothal period.

Roo

[didymus]

Aug 23, 2010 10:45:04 GMT -5 @kangaroojack said:

didymus said:

Now the high priest went in to the holy of holies year after year with blood not his own. But Christ went in to the presence of God with His own blood. And because Christ was a perfect sacrifice, He did not have to go into the Holy of Holies year after year, for if He did , as the text tells us, He would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world.

Hi didymus,

Are you saying that Christ completed the atonement post-cross after all?

Roo

I guess I am. As high priest, he had to do his duties as high priest. Only, this time he only had to do that once for all ages.

Certainly, the cross is not the holy of holies. He did not appear to God on the cross. On the contrary. As God the Father cannot look upon sin. When Jesus said that God had forsaken him, he was not kidding. So, when did Jesus appear to God as High Priest? It had to be after the cross. And we know he did not return to the Father before the ascension. However, I don't believe it took 40 years for Jesus to fulfill his high priestly duties. Part of what Jesus was doing for those 40 years was preparing a place for his bride.

[kangaroojack]

Sept 15, 2010 16:29:46 GMT -5 @didymus said:

Aug 23, 2010 10:45:04 GMT -5 @kangaroojack said:

didymus said:
Hi didymus,

Are you saying that Christ completed the atonement post-cross after all?

Roo

Roo

I guess I am. As high priest, he had to do his duties as high priest. Only, this time he only had to do that once for all ages.

Certainly, the cross is not the holy of holies. He did not appear to God on the cross. On the contrary. As God the Father cannot look upon sin. When Jesus said that God had forsaken him, he was not kidding. So, when did Jesus appear to God as High Priest? It had to be after the cross. And we know he did not return to the Father before the ascension. However, I don't believe it took 40 years for Jesus to fulfill his high priestly duties. Part of what Jesus was doing for those 40 years was preparing a place for his bride.

Man this cold is wearing me out. Se ya later.

Roo