Preterism vs Futurism...a civil discussion.

[D4Christ]

This thread is a carry over from the Revelation 13 thread where the difference between preterism and futurism became evident. So, I am starting this conversation in an attempt to get questions answered from those who have a preterism belief in order to better understand their pov. The conversation is not limited to preterism though, as those who hold a futurism pov may also present their cases.

This is not intended to be a hostile discussion...though passion may sometimes outweigh tone. My desire is to get straight answers to straight questions, allowing all of us to re-evaluate or confirm our current beliefs.

If some choose to call people, who believe differently than them, names because they've dared to express their pov, then may I suggest you use the editing tools at your disposal to make your environment a more pleasant one.

Back to the discussion...

Storm, let's start with the "new heavens and the new earth." I have read that Pret's believe this refers to the new covenant in Heb 8. Is this true (yes or no)

If yes, can we take a look at Heb 8 to 10 to discuss what these chapters say the old covenant is, what the new covenant (n.c.) is and all the n.c. will accomplish?

Blessings,
Dee

 

[Stormcrow]

let's start with the "new heavens and the new earth." I have read that Pret's believe this refers to the new covenant in Heb 8. Is this true (yes or no)

Yes. "Heavens and earth" is a Hebrew idiom for the Temple, which represented the Old Covenant and all it entailed (references to the Temple and its practices are found throughout the book of Hebrews). So "new heavens and new earth" would refer to this new covenant and Temple. First, a little background.

The Temple was the dwelling place of God on earth. It was patterned after the Tabernacle which Moses was told to build. (That Tabernacle was patterned exactly after the heavenly Tabernacle.) The Temple as the dwelling place of God on earth is found through the Old testament.

{1} Then King David said to the entire assembly, "My son Solomon, whom alone God has chosen, is still young and inexperienced and the work is great; for the temple is not for man, but for the LORD God. 1 Chronicles 29:1 (NASB)

{7} Let us go into His dwelling place; Let us worship at His footstool. {8} Arise, O LORD, to Your resting place, You and the ark of Your strength. {9} Let Your priests be clothed with righteousness, And let Your godly ones sing for joy. Psalm 132:7-9 (NASB)

The Law of Moses (also known as the Old Covenant) called for this dwelling place of God on earth.

{8} "Let them construct a sanctuary for Me, that I may dwell among them. {9} "According to all that I am going to show you, as the pattern of the tabernacle and the pattern of all its furniture, just so you shall construct it. Exodus 25:8-9 (NASB)

So from the time of the exodus from Egypt until the Temple's first desolation by the Babylonians (586 BC, a span of some 600 years) Israel's religious, cultural, and national identity was tied to the Tabernacle and later to the Temple.

The phrase "heaven and earth" was an idiom that reflected the closeness the people felt with God through the Temple. It was - again - the place where heaven and earth were united: the place where God's presence - His glory - rested.

The purpose of the New Covenant - essentially - was this: to put the Spirit of God in us: believing Jew and Gentile alike. We are now the Temple of God: the place where God's glory (His presence) dwells on earth.

{16} Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 1 Corinthians 3:16 (NASB)

{19} Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? 1 Corinthians 6:19 (NASB)

{16} Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, "I WILL DWELL IN THEM AND WALK AMONG THEM; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE. 2 Corinthians 6:16 (NASB)

{19} So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, {20} having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, {21} in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, {22} in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit. Ephesians 2:19-22 (NASB)

Christ's sacrifice was to cleanse us of sin before God's presence could indwell us, as is illustrated here:

{15} They assembled their brothers, consecrated themselves, and went in to cleanse the house of the LORD, according to the commandment of the king by the words of the LORD. {16} So the priests went in to the inner part of the house of the LORD to cleanse it, and every unclean thing which they found in the temple of the LORD they brought out to the court of the house of the LORD. Then the Levites received it to carry out to the Kidron valley. 2 Chronicles 29:15-16 (NASB)

The writer of Hebrews is using the work of the Temple priests and Levites to describe the on-going work of the ascended, glorified Christ in heaven, as the work of the earthly priesthood was a foreshadow of God's redemptive plan through Christ.

The glory of the Lord - His very presence - no longer rests in Temples built by human hands. His Spirit rests in us. That's one of the most important distinctions that must be made between the Old and New Covenants.

Now, just to keep this in the spirit of end time discussions, futurists and dispensationalists look forward to a new Temple (third Temple) being built in Jerusalem into which the "Antichrist" will enter and profane by his presence and self-exaltation. But here's the problem: if God's glory no longer rests in a physical structure in Jerusalem, how can a third Temple be holy? And if it isn't holy, how can it be profaned?

The only way for this to happen is if God were to abrogate the covenant of Christ's sacrifice.

There is nothing in the New Testament that says God will return to a system of animal sacrifice to cleanse us from sin. In fact, the writer of Hebrews tells us time and time again about the superiority of Christ's sacrifice over the blood of bulls and goats. There is no justification in scripture for the belief that a third Temple will be raised in Jerusalem, and even if it is, God's presence will not dwell there.

He dwells in us, His church composed of believing Jews and Gentiles.

 

[Hitch]

The glory of the Lord - His very presence - no longer rests in Temples built by human hands. His Spirit rests in us. That's one of the most important distinctions that must be made between the Old and New Covenants.


And probably why the DF have gone so far as to promote the ' parenthetical church age', nonsense.

 

[Stormcrow]

I'm going to hold off posting any more until people have had a chance to process my first response. There's a lot there with implications that go far beyond just that which was written, and I don't want anyone getting overwhelmed or defensive.

It's not easy to change one's most closely held beliefs about something (having just been through it myself) and I certainly can't blame anyone for being confused or resisting this kind of teaching. It's not what I was taught from the pulpit or in Sunday School.

I had a conversation Thanksgiving Day with a friend who thought my views on Revelation - that it was written before 70 AD and had already been fulfilled - took people's hope away from them.

Is this what today's church has come to: false hope being better than "Christ" in us, "the hope of glory?" Are we no better than those "sign-seekers" of Israel who demanded a sign but were too blind to see the one they were given?

I wonder if the church - instead of being fed and led with false hope about prophecies already fulfilled - were to focus intently and consistently on what it means to have the glory of God filling us.

What kind of difference could we make in this world if we weren't all trying to get out of it and, instead, trusted in the power of His indwelling Spirit to guide us while we are here?

What kind of world would it be if the church lived up to its Lord not down to its fears?

Makes me wonder.

 

[Lloyd]

I'm going to hold off posting any more until people have had a chance to process my first response. There's a lot there with implications that go far beyond just that which was written, and I don't want anyone getting overwhelmed or defensive.

It's not easy to change one's most closely held beliefs about something (having just been through it myself) and I certainly can't blame anyone for being confused or resisting this kind of teaching. It's not what I was taught from the pulpit or in Sunday School.

I had a conversation Thanksgiving Day with a friend who thought my views on Revelation - that it was written before 70 AD and had already been fulfilled - took people's hope away from them.

Is this what today's church has come to: false hope being better than "Christ" in us, "the hope of glory?" Are we no better than those "sign-seekers" of Israel who demanded a sign but were too blind to see the one they were given?

I wonder if the church - instead of being fed and led with false hope about prophecies already fulfilled - were to focus intently and consistently on what it means to have the glory of God filling us.

What kind of difference could we make in this world if we weren't all trying to get out of it and, instead, trusted in the power of His indwelling Spirit to guide us while we are here?

What kind of world would it be if the church lived up to its Lord not down to its fears?

Makes me wonder.

Honestly... that is a great post.

 

[Stormcrow]

You can read more about this here, Dee:

http://www.christianforums.net/showthread.php?t=39573&p=593281&viewfull=1#post593281

And that's the last I have to write until I hear back from you.

Peace. Out.

 

[D4Christ]

Yes. "Heavens and earth" is a Hebrew idiom for the Temple, which represented the Old Covenant and all it entailed (references to the Temple and its practices are found throughout the book of Hebrews). So "new heavens and new earth" would refer to this new covenant and Temple. First, a little background.

An idiom is "an expression whose meaning is not predictable from the usualmeanings of its constituent elements." So if you are from American, you should know that "kick the bucket" means die and not actually kicking a bucket. I found many websites that list Hebrew idioms. I could not find one that listed "heavens and earth" as an idiom for temple. This is not to say it doesn't exist...I just have not found it yet. What I did find is the use of "heavens and earth" in Jewish mysticism, which relates to order of how God created and then relating that to the order of how the Tabernacle was built. You can read it here if interested.

At this point though, I don't have enough info to determine that when "temple" is used it means Old Covenant (O.C.). You seem to be suggesting that "heavens and earth" means temple and "temple" means O.C. It could be possible that in some cases it might point to O.C. But we know it doesn't always because when our bodies are referred to as a "temple" it's not speaking about the O.C.

The Temple was the dwelling place of God on earth. It was patterned after the Tabernacle which Moses was told to build. (That Tabernacle was patterned exactly after the heavenly Tabernacle.) The Temple as the dwelling place of God on earth is found through the Old testament… So from the time of the exodus from Egypt until the Temple's first desolation by the Babylonians (586 BC, a span of some 600 years) Israel's religious, cultural, and national identity was tied to the Tabernacle and later to the Temple.

I agree that the Tabernacle and later the Temple (for the Jews Tabernacle and Temple are one idea on a conceptual level) are only copies of the real system of worship in heaven. Though I believe Israel's national identity is still tied to the Temple, which is why they have started to reproduce the items that go in the temple.

The phrase "heaven and earth" was an idiom that reflected the closeness the people felt with God through the Temple. It was - again - the place where heaven and earth were united: the place where God's presence - His glory - rested.

The purpose of the New Covenant - essentially - was this: to put the Spirit of God in us: believing Jew and Gentile alike. We are now the Temple of God: the place where God's glory (His presence) dwells on earth.

The second (new) covenant covered more than that:

Romans 8: 7 If the first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need for a second covenant to replace it. 8 But when God found fault with the people, he said: “The day is coming, says the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel and Judah.
9 This covenant will not be like the one
I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
and led them out of the land of Egypt.
They did not remain faithful to my covenant,
so I turned my back on them, says the Lord.
10 But this is the new covenant I will make
with the people of Israel on that day, says the Lord:
I will put my laws in their minds,
and I will write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11 And they will not need to teach their neighbors,
nor will they need to teach their relatives,
saying, ‘You should know the Lord.’
For everyone, from the least to the greatest,
will know me already.
12 And I will forgive their wickedness,
and I will never again remember their sins

Now, just to keep this in the spirit of end time discussions, futurists and dispensationalists look forward to a new Temple (third Temple) being built in Jerusalem into which the "Antichrist" will enter and profane by his presence and self-exaltation. But here's the problem: if God's glory no longer rests in a physical structure in Jerusalem, how can a third Temple be holy? And if it isn't holy, how can it be profaned?

Ezekiel writes about a future temple…where the Lord resides…that has not been built yet and is not recorded in history. That is why some Jews in Israel are preparing to build the 3rd temple. Unless you think Ezekiel lied, this is prophecy yet to take place. Unlike some, I do not believe this is a temple that will be built for the AC to desecrate. The phrase “sitteth in the Temple†in 2 thess 2 is not speaking about a physical temple. Instead imho, this is the temple that is created sometime before or during the millennial reign.

There is nothing in the New Testament that says God will return to a system of animal sacrifice to cleanse us from sin. In fact, the writer of Hebrews tells us time and time again about the superiority of Christ's sacrifice over the blood of bulls and goats. There is no justification in scripture for the belief that a third Temple will be raised in Jerusalem, and even if it is, God's presence will not dwell there.

There is nothing in the NT about returning to animal sacrifices. But there is mention of it in the OT when it comes to Israel. Part of the new covenant God makes with them requires them to remember God’s laws and decrees. I will admit I don’t completely understand the need for this since Christ is our perfect sacrifice. But I heard a pastor say a long time ago that Israel would be required to honor the LORD and do all that they were supposed to do before they broke the covenant. I had no idea what the pastor was talking about but since I have been scouring the OT about their covenant I have found a repeating theme…..they will be punished, beyond what they have in any time in history…but their restoration would show God’s Holiness to the world…and they will be required to honor God with sacrifices.


Blessings,
Dee

 

[Hitch]

There is nothing in the NT about returning to animal sacrifices. But there is mention of it in the OT when it comes to Israel. Part of the new covenant God makes with them requires them to remember God’s laws and decrees. I will admit I don’t completely understand the need for this since Christ is our perfect sacrifice. But I heard a pastor say a long time ago that Israel would be required to honor the LORD and do all that they were supposed to do before they broke the covenant. I had no idea what the pastor was talking about but since I have been scouring the OT about their covenant I have found a repeating theme…..they will be punished, beyond what they have in any time in history…but their restoration would show God’s Holiness to the world…and they will be required to honor God with sacrifices.

:toofunny


Perhaps you can explain exactly how God is honored by adding the blood of goats and sheep to that of Christ Jesus?

Better yet I wonder whether you can explain why you think Israel is beyond the atonement Christ won at the cross.

To repeat , one of the hallmarks of futurism is a shamefully low view of the work of the cross.

 

[D4Christ]

Storm,

I am taking seriously the points you are making, part of which is the reason it has taken me a few days to respond...research, research, etc. The covenant both old and new is interesting and it takes a lot of OT reading to decipher it. But one thing I have noticed is that under the new covenant, God makes many promises to Israel specifically and many of them have not happened in the history of the world. Therefore there are future events yet to come and I would be remiss to dismiss them to make a point, just as I would be in error to create something in scripture that does not exisit to make a point.

I found an author on the web, who expresses the root of what turned him into a preterist. Here's an excerpt of his explanation.

Question: Has heaven and earth passed away? Ridiculous you say? Let us ask another question: Do you believe the Old Covenant has been done away? I dare say you will say it has. Few believers in Jesus would deny he has established his New Covenant. If you believe the Old Covenant has passed away, then you must believe "heaven and earth" has passed away! Please read the words of Jesus:

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:17-18).
​

Did you notice that Jesus said heaven and earth had to pass away before the law could pass?!? Yes, he really did say it; please, get your scripture right now and read it for yourself! Has the heaven and earth passed away? Well, obviously, physical heaven and earth haven't been destroyed. But read the text again will you? Jesus DID say until heaven and earth pass away the Old Law could not pass. Our choices here are limited.


If we understand the "heaven and earth" as literal, physical heaven and earth then this means the Old Law is still in effect. Simply put the argument would go like this: If heaven and earth had to pass before the Old Law could pass; and if heaven and earth refers to literal, physical heaven and earth, then, since literal, physical heaven and earth still exist, [have not passed], it must be true that the Old Law has not passed.


A person could say the Law here is the Law of Jesus; but this will not work because Jesus had not yet died to confirm his New Covenant. He was living under the Old Law at the time also. The Jews standing there were not concerned with the passing of Jesus' law. They did not believe he even had one! They were concerned with the Old Law! Finally, if this is speaking about the passing of Christ's law it contradicts the verses in the New Testament that teach Jesus' word will never pass away in Matthew 24:35.

On the other hand, if we understand the "heaven and earth" as figurative language, referring not to physical creation, but to something else, it is possible that this "heaven and earth" could pass away, allowing for the passing of the Law.

First of all it's not the Old Law...its just the Law. What is interesting in this passage is that I did not interpret the way the author did. I thought more along the lines of Luke.

Luke 16: 17 But that doesn’t mean that the law has lost its force. It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the smallest point of God’s law to be overturned.

And then there are the scritpures that support the fact although we are not under the Law because we have found grace thru Christ who fulfills the Law's requirements for us, the Law still has purpose.

Rom 3: 19 Obviously, the law applies to those to whom it was given, for its purpose is to keep people from having excuses, and to show that the entire world is guilty before God. 20 For no one can ever be made right with God by doing what the law commands. The law simply shows us how sinful we are.

31 Well then, if we emphasize faith, does this mean that we can forget about the law? Of course not! In fact, only when we have faith do we truly fulfill the law.

Rom 7:12 But still, the law itself is holy, and its commands are holy and right and good.
So the trouble is not with the law, for it is spiritual and good. The trouble is with me, for I am all too human, a slave to sin.

Romans 7:4 says we died to the power of the Law when we died with Christ. But what about those who have not died with Christ....those who have not heard or accepted the gift of salvation. The Law still exists to convict those people that they are guilty before God and that they can never obey God or His Holy Laws without accepting and believing in the sacrifice of God's Son.

1 John 3: 4 Everyone who sins is breaking God’s law, for all sin is contrary to the law of God.

We are not subject to the Law because the Law was fulfilled in Christ. But as long as there is sin the Law will be relevant to this world.

Blessings,
Dee

 

[Stormcrow]

You seem to be suggesting that "heavens and earth" means temple and "temple" means O.C.

The Temple represented the O.C. or literally "embodied" the O.C. The Law was "Temple-centric", starting with the Tabernacle.

It could be possible that in some cases it might point to O.C. But we know it doesn't always because when our bodies are referred to as a "temple" it's not speaking about the O.C.

I believe I made that distinction clear in my posts.

First of all it's not the Old Law...its just the Law.

I make allowances for error. He probably meant Old Covenant and combined Old with Law. I've done similar things myself. I get the writer's point.

Luke 16: 17 But that doesn’t mean that the law has lost its force. It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the smallest point of God’s law to be overturned.

Ah, but this is the part most people don't get: The Law was still in effect for the Jews. Even Jesus was born "under the Law."

{4} But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, {5} so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. Galatians 4:4-5 (NASB)

Gentiles were never under the Law. Israel was. So the apostles were looking forward to a time when they (Jews) would no longer be in bondage to the Law, either. That's what Paul was writing in the letter of Hebrews when he wrote this:

{28} so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him. Hebrews 9:28 (NASB)

Christ died to save both Jew and Gentile alike from sin, but His second coming was to relieve the Jew from his burden to obey the Law: something even Christ told them they would have to obey until heaven and earth passed away!

{17} "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. {18} "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. {19}"Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:17-19 (NASB)

Paul makes it clear: Gentiles were never under the Law. Gentiles were always under grace. But Jews were expected to keep the Law for as long as the Law existed.

This meant the Jews were living with one foot in the Law and the other foot in grace! It's what prompted Paul to write this:

{13} When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. Hebrews 8:13 (NASB)

Again, as illustrated in this verse, the Old had not yet passed but was ready to disappear. Paul then writes this in chapter 9:

{8} The Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing, {9} which is a symbol for the present time. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience, Hebrews 9:8-9 (NASB)

As long as the Temple stood, gifts and sacrifices continued to be made which could not make the worshiper "perfect in conscience." This situation persisted as long as the Temple was standing: it was a still a symbol of the time that Paul had written this letter!

So the Law had to go. The kingdom of God had to be taken away from the corrupt, apostate priesthood (the real rulers of Israel) and Jew and Gentile alike had to be set on equal footing under grace.

This is what the apostles were all looking forward to and when you begin to see what the book of Hebrews was communicating, you can see this thread in almost every epistle in the New Testament, because all of the apostles were Jews.

Hope this helps.

 

[Stormcrow]

One more thing I think bears mentioning: the division of the protestant canon of the Bible into Old and New Testaments between Malachi and Matthew is both arbitrary and unfortunate, because it doesn't reflect the reality under which Christ, His disciples (and, later, apostles) and the rest of Judaism lived. They were all living under the Law until the symbol of that present time was removed.

That symbol was the Temple: the "heaven and earth" that Christ said would pass away in Matthew 24. That symbol was destroyed in 70 AD and - with it - the imperfect system of animal sacrifice that kept the Jew in bondage both to the Law and to an "imperfect conscience."

 

[Beck]

Storm, let's start with the "new heavens and the new earth." I have read that Pret's believe this refers to the new covenant in Heb 8. Is this true (yes or no)

If yes, can we take a look at Heb 8 to 10 to discuss what these chapters say the old covenant is, what the new covenant (n.c.) is and all the n.c. will accomplish?

Blessings,
Dee

Hi Dee,

I would say that Hebrews 9 speaks volumes of the difference between that second tabernacle (holy of hoiles) that is made with hands to that the true and prefect tabernacle (Holy of Hoiles) as the Body of Christ that temple made without hands.

In terms of heaven and earth we really have to understand the usage of these two terms as toward Israel.

Isaiah mentions this in chapter 65:17-25 in contrast the heaven and earth that passed away is the the heaven ( the earthly temple of the holy of holies, place of God dwells) and the earth as ( the land of Israel). This two heaven and earth of old Israel and it's old covenant has passed away and made way for the new covenant of God. Isaiah descibed that as the new Jersualem v.18.

There's alot more, but I hope that at least helps in the undersatnding of heaven and earth.

 

[n2thelight]

I will just say,one must understand the differences between,biblical laws statutes and ordinances........

 

[jasoncran]

what does the idea of the kinsmen redeemer play into all of this?

adam lost it all and christ gained it back.

if the earth is still under the curse when was it redeemed? adam was a soul. but the word soul isnt just one word in hebrew. animals have souls as well and so does the earth.