Wednesday, April 04, 2007

I'm not trying to CONVINCE you to embrace heresy...

ADAM said: The opinions listed below are not meant to CONVINCE YOU that your views are "wrong" or "ungodly"
RHOLOGY: Then why should I or anyone else care what you have to say?


ADAM: I am happy that you have your views if they fulfill you.
RHOLOGY: The happy-go-lucky, head-in-the-sand view of the universalist. See, that's what I don't get. Everyone will be saved, there's no sin or judgment. Why do you even interact w/ me here or at the Living Room blog?

ADAM: the people of the OT, and their stories, are dung.
RHOLOGY: OK, so it's not the OT **itself** that is dung. Man, seriously, in the future you could state it better right off the bat.
But Abraham, though he was "but dust and ashes" by his own admission, yet b/c he had faith, was justified and a righteous man. We do the Atonement and power of Christ a disservice when we talk that way of His people.

ADAM: I am here to show people that my views are not anti-Christianity,
RHOLOGY: Since Xtianity is defined by the Bible, and you are in so many direct conflicts w/ biblical teaching, I cannot agree.

ADAM: The definition of heretic within the Book and also in modern dictionaries is "That which goes against the Organized Church."
RHOLOGY: I don't care about that - I am using a biblical concept.

ADAM: So why did God threaten (and do!) Judgment against Israel and the Jews? God never changes, right?
RHOLOGY: What a ridiculous argument. Does that mean God has to *change* when He *does* something different? Please - you don't believe that and I don't.

ADAM: I say His Plan changed based on saving all men.
RHOLOGY: And Jesus said different, so there again we have confirmation that you are an enemy of God.

ADAM: The Law was needed as the guardian of Israel until the true guardian came
RHOLOGY: Agreed. But WHY did we need it to lead us to Christ? Hint - it's right there at the end of v. 24.
And this "made right w/ God" = dikaioo, better translated as "justified".

ADAM: After Christ's Presence? None.
RHOLOGY: Assertion w/o an argument that nobody would accept unless and until they slammed your Kool-Aid and asked for seconds.

ADAM: The God of peace will come "soon."
RHOLOGY: Rom 16:20 - The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.
Not only are you allergic to context but also to accurate citations.

ADAM: English translations were coopted by mortals who desired control and profit. LaHaye, Scofield, Moody, Hinn, Hagee, the Popes -- all modified the texts to suit their own lives.
RHOLOGY: Prove it, starting w/ this question - why can I buy a Nestle-Aland Greek NT and check it against Codex Vaticanus and find 99% correspondence?

ADAM: there are also verses that are adamant against the Jews of Rome who disbelieve
RHOLOGY: It doesn't say anything about the Jews OF ROME, at least in chs 1-3.

ADAM: Revelation shows us who is to be Judged
RHOLOGY: It also says that ALL the dead will be judged, including "the sea gave up all the dead in it", and those who were not found in the Book of Life were thrown into the Lake of Fire. That's not just Israel.
It's amazing - you write so much but skip so much too.
Would you mind dealing w/ some of my main 3 points on my Hymenaeanism Discussed post? Those are more cogent to our differences.

Peace,
ALAN

8 comments:

A.B. Dada said...

Rhoblogy: Then why should I or anyone else care what you have to say?

Probably my favorite question from Preterist detractors! The answer: you shouldn't BELIEVE anyone but God and God's Book. Pastors, Preachers, Evangelists, Writers, Authors, Theologians -- some might have hidden reasons for what they do. They may actually believe what they preach, but they may not. Who knows? I say what I say in order to try to bring a refocus to certain parts of the Book that MANY Christians are confused about -- and that their Pastors don't answer in a way that makes sense. I also try to prod people to reading the Book themselves; I know of many Christians who haven't, except in pieces and steps like it is taught in various sermons that go all over the place.


Rhoblogy: The happy-go-lucky, head-in-the-sand view of the universalist. See, that's what I don't get. Everyone will be saved, there's no sin or judgment. Why do you even interact w/ me here or at the Living Room blog?

Saying it in a negative way doesn't mean that it isn't true. Even Christ showed a difference between actions leading to a Kingdom view and faith leading to salvation. We have to ask "Salvation from WHAT?" and "What is the Kingdom view?" Why do I interact? Because so many Christians are going through a faith crisis -- many in my life, and many I know online. I hope I can be one voice of many that helps lead them to the Book, to personal/private prayer, and to receive guidance from the Spirit that Jesus and God left for us to use to better God's Kingdom on Earth.


Rhoblogy: OK, so it's not the OT **itself** that is dung. Man, seriously, in the future you could state it better right off the bat.
But Abraham, though he was "but dust and ashes" by his own admission, yet b/c he had faith, was justified and a righteous man. We do the Atonement and power of Christ a disservice when we talk that way of His people.


I probably should. I caused a major fervor in my very-own fellowship (Baptist Evangelical) when some read my view on the OT (people) as dung, heh. I'll try to set it correctly in the future.

As to disservice, I don't agree. I think it is of major importance that we realize that ACTIONS meant nothing to God if those actions weren't backed up by a righteous heart. So how do we have righteous hearts? We don't. We can't. Only Jesus offered that, and His very actions and faith was enough to bring righteousness to all -- especially those who accept it.


Rhoblogy: Since Xtianity is defined by the Bible, and you are in so many direct conflicts w/ biblical teaching, I cannot agree.

Nothing I espouse goes in conflict with Biblical teaching, it goes in conflict with modern fellowship teaching. What I espouse robs the fellowship of power, and puts the power into the individual to do better for others. Christianity is NOT defined by the Bible except in bearing good fruit for others, and when asked why, give it up to the Lord. That's it.


Rhoblogy: I don't care about that - I am using a biblical concept.

Yet the definition of heresy is one that was used by the most evil of Christians for all of the New Age. I embrace that definition because it is true: one day I would love to see the Ecclesia move away from buildings, denominations, creeds, doctrines and pursuits of force and fear.


Rhoblogy: What a ridiculous argument. Does that mean God has to *change* when He *does* something different? Please - you don't believe that and I don't.

I was making fun of the typical "God never changes, right?" statement I get from Evangelicals. I hear it all the time, that I am saying that God changed. I'm not. No one but God knew of His Plan, until Christ came and explained it. Revelation shows that His Plan included His Old Covenant being sealed so the New Age can come forth.


Rhoblogy: And Jesus said different, so there again we have confirmation that you are an enemy of God.

I should have said that God's Plan included changing Covenants, not an actual change of Plan. My mistake. I can only refute the idea that I am an enemy of God with the hope that my blessings here and in the afterlife are solid, and I bear good fruit (that I try hard not to connect to myself and do it in private). Those who know me may disagree with you, but it is only God's blessing that I am looking for.


Rhoblogy: But WHY did we need it to lead us to Christ? Hint - it's right there at the end of v. 24.
And this "made right w/ God" = dikaioo, better translated as "justified".


I disagree. We needed the Law to see that we could never do it ourselves, hence why it lead us to needing Jesus to come, win over death, and then finally win over sin.


Rhoblogy: The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

And I say He did crush Satan. Even Revelation says "soon."


Rhoblogy: Prove it, starting w/ this question - why can I buy a Nestle-Aland Greek NT and check it against Codex Vaticanus and find 99% correspondence?

Tough to answer, but I'll try. First and foremost, the Second Church leaders that came after the Tribulation were vying for power. The Popes seemed to be the ones powerful enough to even take over Rome (even though Israel was Judged for tying in with Rome). I see no real power in the ancient men who killed "heretics" who espoused similar beliefs to my own -- Eusebius, Justin Martyr, Grotius, etc). If a "Man of God" used force to murder infidels and heretics, he was probably no man of God. Many "church" leaders in history have no connection to the teaching of Jesus beyond the power they wielded out of fear. This leads me to believe that we must take Bible translations with a grain of salt unless we study them ourselves and realize what the translators had to gain from creating a new edition.

I use the Nestle-Aland text myself (recent edition), and I do see significant problems between it and the KJV and newer versions, especially in relation to many prophetical words and words meaning groups. Since most Christians believe every Bible is inerrant and God-inspired, it is a tough debate -- but more eyes are opened now that the Internet offers instant review of the old texts versus the new ones.


Rhoblogy: It doesn't say anything about the Jews OF ROME, at least in chs 1-3.

As I said, both are included.


Rhoblogy: It also says that ALL the dead will be judged, including "the sea gave up all the dead in it", and those who were not found in the Book of Life were thrown into the Lake of Fire. That's not just Israel.

Correct. I do believe that all who died before Israel was Judged at the Parousia were Judged for their eternal salvation during this time. We know there were two parts of the War -- the mortal part (Romans over Jews and some Gentiles), and the spiritual part (the dead/Satan/etc). I firmly believe the dead were Resurrected directly to the Spiritual Heaven if they were Judged righteous. The rest were probably annihilated.


Would you mind dealing w/ some of my main 3 points on my Hymenaeanism Discussed post? Those are more cogent to our differences.

I'll go re-read it now.

danny wright said...

I'm a brand new blogger, and one of my objectives was to learn how to better debate those who want to be won over, for I'm convinced that there are those that do. Thank you for a thought provoking debate.

Rhology said...

Easter break...

He is risen!

Anonymous said...

In the last, sentence you used the word cogent. Germane would be a better choice.

Rhology said...

Ah! Yes it would. Thanks!

Rhology said...

The obfuscations grow denser...

AB DADA: The answer: you shouldn't BELIEVE anyone but God and God's Book.
RHOLOGY: I'm gathering more and more admissions of defeat from you.

AB DADA: some might have hidden reasons for what they do.
RHOLOGY: Ah yes, but not you!

AB DADA: I also try to prod people to reading the Book themselves
RHOLOGY: You have many many biblical psgs to respond to before I'll believe that.

AB DADA: We have to ask "Salvation from WHAT?"
RHOLOGY: Good question. In the Bible, it's salvation from sin.

AB DADA: I hope I can be one voice of many that helps lead them to the Book, to personal/private prayer, and to receive guidance from the Spirit that Jesus and God left for us to use to better God's Kingdom on Earth.
RHOLOGY: But why?

AB DADA: Only Jesus offered that, and His very actions and faith was enough to bring righteousness to all
RHOLOGY: Well, yes, if you mean it in the way that the NT writers did, in Hebrews and in Colossians among others.

Colossians 2:13-15 - And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.

AB DADA: Christianity is NOT defined by the Bible except in bearing good fruit for others
AB DADA: I hope I can be one voice of many that helps lead them to the Book
RHOLOGY: Which one do you want to lead people to? The Bible or Christianity?

AB DADA: Yet the definition of heresy is one that was used by the most evil of Christians for all of the New Age.
RHOLOGY: Another assertion devoid of an argument. And, I daresay, an assertion that would require years of reading ch history.
And I personally would hesitate quite a while before labeling the Apostle Paul as among "the most evil of Christians".

AB DADA: one day I would love to see the Ecclesia move away from buildings, denominations, creeds, doctrines and pursuits of force and fear.
RHOLOGY: But it's not *sinful* for the Ecclesia to be in buildings, denominations, and creeds now, right? B/c there is no sin, right?

AB DADA: I hear it all the time, that I am saying that God changed.
RHOLOGY: Oh OK. No, I wouldn't say that. I simply argue that you have God wrong from the very start.

AB DADA: Revelation shows that His Plan included His Old Covenant being sealed so the New Age can come forth.
RHOLOGY: In all of our interaction up to this point on this blog, you have not interacted w/ one single psg that I've cited from Revelation.

AB DADA: the hope that my blessings here and in the afterlife are solid, and I bear good fruit
RHOLOGY: You bear fruit that is "gangrene" in fellowships and leads people to "shipwreck" their faith. That's not good fruit.

AB DADA: And I say He did crush Satan. Even Revelation says "soon."
RHOLOGY: But that's beside the point. You said Rom 16 said Jesus was "coming" soon. I pointed out that "coming" does not appear in Rom 16. You responded by changing the subject.

AB DADA: First and foremost, the Second Church leaders that came after the Tribulation were vying for power.
RHOLOGY: More like, they were hiding for their lives from quite a few waves of persecution by local and Roman authorities. Not a good context for "vying for power" or corrupting manuscripts. But you're going to run into a problem...

AB DADA: The Popes seemed to be the ones powerful enough to even take over Rome
RHOLOGY: Only Codex Vaticanus is older than any real power for the Roman Pope.

AB DADA: I see no real power in the ancient men who killed "heretics" who espoused similar beliefs to my own -- Eusebius, Justin Martyr, Grotius, etc
RHOLOGY: I highly doubt that Justin Martyr or Eusebius held to Docetism, Gnosticism, Hymenaeanism, or an already-past non-physical resurrection.

AB DADA: This leads me to believe that we must take Bible translations with a grain of salt unless we study them ourselves and realize what the translators had to gain from creating a new edition.
RHOLOGY: I knew it. You missed the point b/c you simply must deny what I'm saying to sustain your argument.
Codex Vaticanus is around 1700 yrs old. It corresponds to around 99% in the Greek text w/ the *modern Nestle-Aland Greek NT*. The Nestle-Aland is sold around the world and can be checked by dozens and dozens of different ways and resources. Your complaint about "power-hungry translators" is foolish. W/o translators and the underpinning translation and koine Greek education, you yourself have no reason to believe you know anything the Bible says.
But of course, you can't decide whether the Bible is worth reading or not, so I don't know what I hope to accomplish by explaining this to you...

AB DADA: and I do see significant problems between it and the KJV
RHOLOGY: That's b/c the KJV is based on younger and less reliable MSS.

AB DADA: Since most Christians believe every Bible is inerrant and God-inspired, it is a tough debate
RHOLOGY: No, not really.

AB DADA: As I said, both are included.
RHOLOGY: Then answer the question I've posed like 3 times now - how were the Jews OF ROME changed at the supposed Parousia in 70 AD, as 1 Cor 15 tells us we will be changed?

AB DADA: The rest were probably annihilated.
RHOLOGY: I'm not trying to make light of this, but I don't know whether to laugh or cry, so I laugh.
Check another box for "Heresies that AB DADA holds to." Annihilationism.
Why "probably"? On what basis might you conclude they were or weren't one way or the other?


Peace,
ALAN

Rhology said...

Oh, I see in this other combox that you answered the question about Roman Christians in 70 AD and how they were changed. Sorry - it gets a little scattered around here. Nature of the beast, I guess.

I asked: how were the Roman Christians changed in 70 AD, as numerous psgs I've already cited tell us that we will be changed at the Parousia and Resurrection?
In particular, I'd specify 1 Cor 15 and Phil 3:20-21.

You replied: Mortally and physically? Not at all.

And that's the thing. Anyone who's reading this can easily go read 1 Cor 15 and see whether it is possible rationally and consistently to hold that the event of the Resurrection will NOT consist of any mortal or physical change.

You then said: But the burden of perfection was fulfilled, the Old Covenant was sealed, and those who listened and scattered to the mountains were freed from the mortal and spiritual Judgment that happened.

You're just listing your assumptions to me, but I don't care about them. You can't tell us where 1 Cor 15 was fulfilled, and you can't tell us how biblically all these things supposedly happened in 70 AD. Your arguments are a wasteland, and it's sad, b/c you're obviously a bright and intelligent guy. But mindpower is no match for the devil's blinders.

Peace,
ALAN

A.B. Dada said...

Rhoblogy: RHOLOGY: I'm gathering more and more admissions of defeat from you.

I don't see how saying that we can only trust God and God's Book is admitting defeat. I am saying that we can't trust you nor me, but most Evangelical Futurists want to trust their Pastor even though the Pastor may not cover more than a few books/verses of the Book in a given year (or lifetime!) How many congregations address all the Books? How many Pastors try to "sell" people on a theory based on picking verses from 10 different Books in both Testaments? I don't think you can get very enlightened without delving into the Book yourself, freeing yourself of previous mortal indoctrination ("teaching of doctrine.")



Rhoblogy: Ah yes, but not you!

Let's compare me (a Preterist) with a typical Pastor (Futurist);

Pastor: Believe, join the congregation, tithe and serve the congregation, tell other believers that they don't believe enough or believe wrongly.

Me: Believe, see you are part of a huge body, serve those in your community directly, love all regardless of faith.

Hmm, yeah, I guess I do have a reason to promote my view of the Book and God -- to free people of slavery to a fellowship, to free them of the fear that you and your ilk promote.



RHOLOGY: Good question. In the Bible, it's salvation from sin.

I don't think many Evangelical Futurists would concur with you -- I believe we see that "salvation" was from the penalty of sin, not sin itself. I do believe that Jesus came to save all men from the penalty of sin: eternal separation from God. I don't see Jesus coming to save us from sin, though, just the penalty. By fulfilling the Law, He showed us that we are freed from that penalty. His vanquishing of Sin later (at the Parousia), was just the final sealing of the Old Covenant with the Jews -- finally making all men equal in God's Love.


RHOLOGY: But why?

Because I feel it is everyone's responsibility to teach that individually together we are more powerful than any group. The "Church" and the "State" both teach that we must be grouped to be powerful -- Christ showed the power of individuals as part of the Body. Everyone has different talents, needs, desires and goals -- God created us as such. By proclaiming an end to sin, we also proclaim that we all are now kings (of our own lives and property) and are freed of the need for kings, judges, and armed forces. Love is greater than hate, finally.


Rhoblogy: Which one do you want to lead people to? The Bible or Christianity?

Neither. I want to lead people to realizing the power that they have in themselves -- that God created them with. Rather than hold to the old Pharisees school of thought (give in to those above you who should control and lead you), we can hold to the Jesus school of thought -- the Church is within you, and is made up of all of you, and you alone are endowed with a gift of talents from God who wants you to use those talents to better the lives of those directly around you. We don't need to move to far-off lands and preach a Gospel that the world has already heard (and did in the very day of Jesus, as the Bible shows!). We don't need to preach about "Hell" and "damnation" when instead we can should people how powerful God created them, and how that power can better those around them, to bring life more beautiful for themselevs, which pleases God. We are kings and stewards, now.


Rhoblogy: And I personally would hesitate quite a while before labeling the Apostle Paul as among "the most evil of Christians".

It is shocking to me how conceited you are and ill-read in what I write. I said "in the New Age" not "in the Old Age." Paul was in the Old Age when he used the term "heresy." The New Age has no heresy since the real Church exists in just individuals, not groups or buildings or religions. Heresy in the New Age, in my opinion, is organized religion of any kind -- that creates "levels" of leadership or power within the Church. Christ relieved us of having to need Temples and buildings and organization, since we are all part of the Body now.


Rhoblogy: But it's not *sinful* for the Ecclesia to be in buildings, denominations, and creeds now, right? B/c there is no sin, right?

Nothing is "wrong" any longer based on God's Love for all, but if it doesn't further His Kingdom as it is right in front of you, it is just a waste of time. If you are not doing better for those directly in front of you and behind you, in your very community, you are just wasting your time. God doesn't care about buildings and walls and groups, He cares about each individual's stewarding over His Earth. Your "only" talent might be pulling weeds out of gardens, but if it makes God's Earth better, He is pleased. If you give up that talent to "plant" a "church," God is likely not even noticing. I know so many Christians who fail time and again at planting a "church" or serving in a "church," when they could be using their God-given talents to making their communities better today, rather than sitting and waiting and wondering.


Rhoblogy: In all of our interaction up to this point on this blog, you have not interacted w/ one single psg that I've cited from Revelation.

Maybe I just missed it. I'd love a list of what I missed -- there are a lot of threads here, and sub-threads in the comboxes :)


Rhoblogy: You bear fruit that is "gangrene" in fellowships and leads people to "shipwreck" their faith. That's not good fruit.

Fellowships are not Godly any longer since Jesus absolved us of Temple Worship and Sacrifice. That's over -- that's the Old Age of the Pharisees. We are now free from "doing church" in a building or organization, and instead BEING THE CHURCH as individuals interacting with other individuals purely with love and grace.

I do like the quote of shipwrecking their faith. If your faith is a ship, I want to see you wreck that faith into the rocks that I call KNOWLEDGE. We don't need faith in Christ, we need to KNOW Christ. We don't need faith in God, we need to KNOW God. I know Christ came, lived perfectly, died on a cross (or a pole), was resurrected, and brought forth the Holy Spirit for all. I know He returned in Presence to vanquish Sin and close the Old Convenant with the Jews, for all men, especially believers. I know we live in the New Covenant where God lets us live perfect lives of stewardship and kingship IF WE SEE the Kingdom, which most fail to because they are relying on faith of a future event rather than knowledge that all is complete and fulfilled. God is silent, now, reigning in the Heavenly Kingdom, with Jesus at His side. We have the Spirit to guide us, needing not Pastors or Messengers or Prophets or Seers.


Rhoblogy: But that's beside the point. You said Rom 16 said Jesus was "coming" soon. I pointed out that "coming" does not appear in Rom 16. You responded by changing the subject.

Thank you for pointing that out -- it does NOT say coming anywhere. But it does say that God will SOON crush Satan -- not by coming, but by destroying those who say they are of God's People (the Jews) and are worshiping pagan-style and mortal kings. Satan, in this case, was the apostasy, not an evil being. The Jews were apostatic, and God would soon crush them. The word SOON does exist in Romans 16. Paul is writing to the believers in gratitude for not being Satanic, meaning not being apostatic, nearing the End Times of the Old Covenant.


Rhoblogy: I highly doubt that Justin Martyr or Eusebius held to Docetism, Gnosticism, Hymenaeanism, or an already-past non-physical resurrection.

Justin Martyr, Preterist: http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/j/justin-martyr.html

Eusebius, Preterist:
... these facts, as well as the whole tenor of the war, and each particular of its progress, when finally "the abomination of desolation, according to the prophetic declaration, stood in the very temple of God, so celebrated of old, but which now was approaching its total downfall and final destruction by fire; all this, I say, any one that wishes may see accurately stated in the history written by Josephus." (Eusebius; Esslesiastical History, Book 3, Ch.5). After quoting sections of Matt. 24:19-21; Lk. 19:41ff and Lk. 21:20, 23, 24, Eusebius says this about the destruction of Jerusalem: "All this occurred" in this manner, in the second year of the reign of Vespasian (70 A.D.)

Both were Preterists.


Rhoblogy: It corresponds to around 99% in the Greek text w/ the *modern Nestle-Aland Greek NT*.

That is part of the lie, straightforwardly, because we know strongly how various translations of "world" and "tribes" and "people" and "nations" were slaughtered even in historical times. I do believe that the KJV is probably one of the closest accurate translations (KJ2 is even better), but they still slaughter the words that Jews of the 1st century would understand with words WE think we understand. Even the word "love" means different today than it did 2000 years ago, so while the translation might be correct, the understanding of the translation is skewed by modern misconceptions. I would have to write for 5 days straight to cover all the errors in the Latin->English, Greek->English and Hewbrew->English variants. I hope that I can do that some day this year, though.


Rhoblogy: Then answer the question I've posed like 3 times now - how were the Jews OF ROME changed at the supposed Parousia in 70 AD, as 1 Cor 15 tells us we will be changed?

The entire 1 Corinthians 15 passage is a very difficult one to just write about point by point, since it refers to old prophecy of the Old Testament in many ways. I concur with Preterist David Friedman on about 95% of his explanation on 1 Corinthians 15 being purely spiritual in nature, not physical:

http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyBible/Corinthians_First/Articles/spiritualresurrection.html

It's a LONG article, but it details the connections with prophecy of the Old Testament as well as following through the spiritual viewpoint as given in the New Testament. I feel you really do look at the Bible as full of lies, otherwise how do you explain Colossians 3:3?

3 For you died to this life, and your real life is hidden with Christ in God.

So they already died, right? Their bodies must be gone, and they, right then and there, must have new bodies. Yet no one saw these new bodies, did they? Or is God a liar, as you would let others believe? God changed them, they died, but they didn't die mortally, right? Or did they not die? How did they die, if the passage said it already happened?

Ezekiel 37 talks of dying and being reborn spiritual:

12 Therefore, prophesy to them and say, `This is what the Sovereign LORD says: O my people, I will open your graves of exile and cause you to rise again. Then I will bring you back to the land of Israel.13 When this happens, O my people, you will know that I am the LORD.14 I will put my Spirit in you, and you will live again and return home to your own land.

They died to exile, and they would rise again from this grave, through the Spirit, being free to live in their own land. Or did God mean they would die a physical death and be reborn into a perfect body?


Rhoblogy: Check another box for "Heresies that AB DADA holds to." Annihilationism. Why "probably"? On what basis might you conclude they were or weren't one way or the other?

We have no idea what happened to the unjust who died before Jesus' Resurrection after the Parousia and vanquishing of Sin. All we know is that those unjust are "probably" not living in eternity with God's Love, but we have no real understanding of where they went, if anywhere. Some Preterists believe ALL were raised and ALL were justified by the Cross and the Parousia -- I don't think the Book offers must insight into this, and it doesn't really matter because all who died mortally after the Parousia are part of the Body that was freed from the penalty of Sin (1 Timothy 4:10).


Futurists hold to a literal and physical Resurrection of the righteous, even though the Bible has always been allegorical in response to how God works. Christ said the change would not be visible in a mortal sense, and the Old Prophecies never lead to a physical change, either. God lives in the Spirit, and our mortal bodies are allowed to show others the spiritual difference between being a serving believer (living and seeing the Kingdom now), and not serving/believing.

Salvation was for the Jews (and Gentiles) in Jerusalem at the time of God's Judgment (the Parousia, the return of the Presence of Christ). The Roman Army fulfilled this completely. Salvation was NOT for bringing forth a new Earth but a New Covenant to all men, especially believers at that time in that place of the whole Earth. The Jews were destroyed (their "Heaven and Earth," the Great Temple, was destroyed forever, never to be rebuilt). The Pharisees lost power (and many died). The Christians fled to the mountains, as prophecized, and were able to live on the rest of their lives in silence since they saw fulfillment as Christ promised -- after Revelation, the Book is silent, as we don't need further instruction since we were given all that we need.

I am sorry that you were indoctrinated as a child with bad worship songs about a future Return. I am sorry that your pastors and teachers through your life have taught you but a portion of ignorant organized religion. I am sorry that you seemingly waste your life "waiting" for a "calling" to do something while God created you to do something today that betters your very community, in the area you life, the family you have (both in faith, blood and out of both). I am sorry that you can not see the Kingdom because you refuse -- because you judge other, hate others, and want to control others through fear and deception by teaching literal meanings to a God whose Kingdom is not of this world. God left the earth to us to steward over, freed from His Judgment and secure in His Love for all, especially those who believe and LIVE that belief rather than just talk the talk.

God isn't dead, God is reigning in His Immortal Kingdom. Jesus isn't dead, Jesus is reigning by the Father's side. We have the Spirit, we have the talents, we must go forth and solely produce good fruit in servitude to others with only love and not hatred, in order to see the Kingdom here and now. Hopefully, producing good fruit in the mortal world will offer us treasures in the immortal world -- but what that means, not even the Book explains fully.

Sit. Wait. Have faith. That's fine with me -- I don't condemn you. I will walk, work and have knowledge of all that Christ did for all men, especially believers. It is evident that God's People are now everyone, since people of all faiths and beliefs are blessed as much as those of strict organized religious beliefs. There is no difference other than doing good works to see the Kingdom, and holding a KNOWLEDGE in what Christ DID, rather than having faith in what He might do in the future, even though that was promised to be done 2000 years ago.