How would you answer?

[Allyn]

A poster on another discussion board and going by the name StudyingPreterism had the following to say in response to the question as to how Full-Preterism has made a mis-step concerning the interpretation of various time indicators.
The poster said the following:

Hi LetGodBeTrue, I am studying preterism and I consider myself a preterist. I think full preterism is circular reasoning. Everything has to be fullfilled because full preterism says so. Let me give you a few verses I feel certain are future;

1. Acts 17v30-31. The whole world literally - Athens included - were not judged in AD 70.
2. Romans 11v25-27 / Acts 3v21. Old covenant Israel is rejected but not cut off forever.
3. 1 Cor 15v24-28, Romans 8v21-23 and other passages by Paul teaching a future restoration of all things.
4. Rev 20v7-10. I agree with JS Russell and Duncan Mckenzie that at least that part of Revelation is still future.

How would you answer those statements?

[didymus]

Dec 19, 2010 10:16:54 GMT -5 Allyn said:

A poster on another discussion board and going by the name StudyingPreterism had the following to say in response to the question as to how Full-Preterism has made a mis-step concerning the interpretation of various time indicators.
The poster said the following:

Hi LetGodBeTrue, I am studying preterism and I consider myself a preterist. I think full preterism is circular reasoning. Everything has to be fullfilled because full preterism says so. Let me give you a few verses I feel certain are future;

1. Acts 17v30-31. The whole world literally - Athens included - were not judged in AD 70.
2. Romans 11v25-27 / Acts 3v21. Old covenant Israel is rejected but not cut off forever.
3. 1 Cor 15v24-28, Romans 8v21-23 and other passages by Paul teaching a future restoration of all things.
4. Rev 20v7-10. I agree with JS Russell and Duncan Mckenzie that at least that part of Revelation is still future.

How would you answer those statements?

I think it depends on whether these events are physical or spiritual. If spiritual, which is the position I take, then they all could easily be fulfilled.

Personally, I believe that much has been fulfilled at the cross. That is where the Old Covenant came to an end, and the New Covenant began. To suggest that the Old Covenant hasn't ended forever is to suggest that Christ failed to accomplish something on the cross. I can't accept that. The only way to bring back Old Covenant Israel is to also bring back the Old Covenant. What would be the purpose of that? And, what would happen to the New Covenant?

The restoration of all things is in Christ. There is no mystery in that.

As far as the loosing of Satan. Is this literal in the physical realm, then that would have happened in 1070AD, would it not have? But, how would we have known that as Satan is a spiritual being?

[mtymousie]

Actually, the "world" was judged when Christ returned in 70 AD. And, since 70 AD was still in the "future" then it was only natural for the writers to address the judgment as a future event.
The Revelation was written to address those things which would "shortly come to pass".
A very interesting thought occurs when you read where Daniel was told to seal his prophecy because it would not occur for another 600 years but John was told not to seal his prophecy because it was about to happen!

[mellontes]

If the old covenant truly came to an end at the cross, then what was in processing of coming to an end in Hebrews 8:13?

[Allyn]

There appears to be some disagreement here but I believe the Old Covenant, the levitical law and certain aspects of the Law of Moses which are almost one and the same, is what came to a definite end at the destruction of the Temple by 70AD. The law of Christ which was encompassed by "Love the Lord your God with all your soul and with all your might and love your neighbor as yourself" came into being prior to the cross but was overshadowed by the Law of sacrifice until its end.

[Morris]

Dec 20, 2010 21:00:42 GMT -5 @mellontes said:

If the old covenant truly came to an end at the cross, then what was in processing of coming to an end in Hebrews 8:13?

It's a corpse; the dead body lying dead and decaying. The act of conforming to the law does not put that law into effect.

God gave the law and commanded the people to adhere to it. The law wasn't in effect because the people observed it, it was in effect because God established it. Seen from the other side, the law could not be annulled simply because the people stopped observing it, only God could annul it.

Simply put, the law's authority did not dwell in the will of people, but in the will of God alone. If I were to gather a group of people together and resume the regime as found in the law, would that then reestablish, or resurrect, the old law? It is not in our power to begin, extend, or end, any law of God. All we can do is obey or not obey.

Even so, the acts of the law were not the essence of the law. The acts were to flow out of a grateful and loving heart towards God. Psalms 51 gives a very clear picture of this, says things such as;

"Behold, You desire truth in the inward parts, And in the hidden part You will make me to know wisdom... Create in me a clean heart, O God, And renew a steadfast spirit within me... For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it; You do not delight in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, A broken and a contrite heart — These, O God, You will not despise...Then You shall be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, With burnt offering and whole burnt offering; Then they shall offer bulls on Your altar".

See also, Psalm 4:5, Psalm 141:2, Proverbs 21:3, and Psalm 40:6.

Also in 2 Chronicles 29:31 we read, "Then Hezekiah answered and said, “Now that you have consecrated yourselves to the LORD, come near, and bring sacrifices and thank offerings into the house of the LORD.” So the assembly brought in sacrifices and thank offerings, and as many as were of a willing heart brought burnt offerings".

Even in the giving of the law, God clearly shows what it is all about. Jeremiah 7:21-27 is rather interesting.

Deuteronomy 10:12-16,
"And now, Israel, what does the LORD your God require of you, but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all His ways and to love Him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to keep the commandments of the LORD and His statutes which I command you today for your good? Indeed heaven and the highest heavens belong to the LORD your God, also the earth with all that is in it. The LORD delighted only in your fathers, to love them; and He chose their descendants after them, you above all peoples, as it is this day. Therefore circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and be stiff-necked no longer."

A confirmation; 2 Kings 23:25
"Now before him there was no king like him, who turned to the LORD with all his heart, with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the Law of Moses; nor after him did any arise like him".

See also, Ezra 7:10, Psalm 37:31, Psalm 40:8, Proverbs 3:1, Isaiah 51:7, Romans 2:15.

Without this central aspect of the heart, the acts of the law were nothing but abominations. Proverbs 21:27 says, "The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination; How much more when he brings it with wicked intent!". Isaiah also contains this truth; Isaiah 1:11, Isaiah 1:13, Isaiah 43:24.

Isaiah 66:2-4 describes this in light of Christ's appearance.
"'For all those things My hand has made, And all those things exist', Says the LORD. 'But on this one will I look: On him who is poor and of a contrite spirit, And who trembles at My word. He who kills a bull is as if he slays a man; He who sacrifices a lamb, as if he breaks a dog’s neck; He who offers a grain offering, as if he offers swine’s blood; He who burns incense, as if he blesses an idol. Just as they have chosen their own ways, And their soul delights in their abominations, So will I choose their delusions, And bring their fears on them; Because, when I called, no one answered, When I spoke they did not hear; But they did evil before My eyes, And chose that in which I do not delight.'"

The "law" that the people observed after Christ came was nothing but a dead body, an abomination no different than the sacrifices which the heathens around them had. And they were going to be judged for it because there heart was not toward God but toward themselves, and the perceived righteousness they attained for themselves through the acts.

Hebrews 8:13 tells us that the old was made old, not because of time, but because of something else being new. With the change in priesthood came a change in how the law is ministered, for even Hebrews 4:1,2 declared that the gospel was preached back in the wilderness, but they did not combine it with faith.

Finally, two passages in Hebrews itself put the issue to rest, even without all else I have provided. Hebrews 7:18,19 says, "For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God".

That "annulling" means "cancellation (literally or figuratively)" according to Strong's, and "abolition, disannulling, put away, rejection" as put by Thayer.

Hebrews 10:9, "then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second"

That "takes away" means "to take up, i.e. adopt; by implication, to take away (violently), i.e. abolish, murder" and "to take away, abolish; 2a) to do away with or abrogate customs or ordinances, 2b) to put out of the way, kill slay a man".

Jesus took the old law to the cross with him, and there through violence He it abolished it, changed the priesthood, and made the realities behind the copies and shadows come to us.

My conclusion: A continuation of the old covenant after Christ, or even a coexistence with the new, is not scripturally possible.

[mellontes]

Dec 21, 2010 11:31:11 GMT -5 Morris said:

My conclusion: A continuation of the old covenant after Christ, or even a coexistence with the new, is not scripturally possible.

Agreed!