The Second Coming of Christ Happened in the First Century?

[Peter]

Posted in CARM preterist section

I've become increasingly concerned for folks in this forum section. It would seem that many may not even think about the fact that for over 2,000 years, a near unanimity of the church, has understood and professed that the Second Coming of Christ is an event that is yet to occur. b]That virtual unanimity also includes churches that hold the eschatologies of partial-preterism and futurism. [/b]

I have witnessed folks in here spiritualize and gnosticize scriptures to bend them to their will, in order to advance ideas such as the elements and/or elemental principles were burned up with fervent heat in the first century, because a long desolate temple caught on fire. Their efforts effectively accomplishing putting those that indoctrinate themselves into such heresy, outside of 2,000 years of Christian tradition - Orthodox or Protestant. One even suggesting that no "rational Bible student" could "deny all these clear facts", even as his personal understanding is at odds with a virtual unanimity of Christian Bible scholars, from throughout the Christian era.

Now I understand there is no shortage of things that aren't right with the "church" and quite enjoyed Frank Viola's "Pagan Christianity" and "Reimagining Church". But this is about suggesting a near unanimity of the body of Christ has been wrong regarding this fundamental for 2,000 years, not about pop-eschatology from within the last one or two hundred years.

There's no need to post proof-texted scriptures - that is, "all these clear facts" - through which you have devised support your conclusion, as threads in this forum section are larded with such exercises. The purpose of this thread is to discover and list where this - Second Coming of Christ is over and done with idea - is to be found held by any group or denomination within the body of Christ past or present, and in particular prior to the 19th century.

Perhaps I'm incorrect in my suggestion of a virtual unanimity. If so, could folks in here please list the historical or modern groups or denominations within the body of Christ, that profess that the Second Coming of Christ was over and done with in the 1st century?
Does the church you attend profess that the Second Coming of Christ happened in the 1st century?
If not, does it concern you to find yourself standing so far outside of the church, on such a fundamental principle?

[Peter]

Hi PeteWaldo;

The purpose of this thread is to discover and list where this - Second Coming of Christ is over and done with idea - is to be found held by any group or denomination within the body of Christ past or present, and in particular prior to the 19th century.

What I see in scripture is that the parousia or coming of the son of man on the clouds occurred in 70 AD. The kingdom of God was firmly and finally fully established at that time meanng that HEAVEN is finally operational for eternal life of believers. That was the first second coming experience and since that time the second coming of Christ occurs at the time of each believers personal death.

Death was defeated back in the first century:
2 Tim 1

 10 but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,

Now that wasn't physical death because physical death is never abolished. It is this death :

Romans 5
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

After our physical death we:

Hebrews 9
 27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

At that meeting with Jesus which is here:
2 Cor 5
10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

THIS HAPPENS!

Matthew 12:37
For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

That's what the bible says. I don't know of any group who says the comings are totally over with .... but maybe!!!!!

[Peter]

What I see in scripture is that the parousia or coming of the son of man on the clouds occurred in 70 AD.

Where is the historical record of that event? The witnesses?
How did you catch it while a near unanimity of the church somehow missed it for nearly 2,000 years unto today?

That's what the bible says. I don't know of any group who says the comings are totally over with .... but maybe!!!!!

Doesn't that seem like a pretty thin hope by which to pit yourself against 2,000 years of Christian tradition regarding the Second Coming? Let alone the risk involved with teaching something so contrary?

Jam 3:1 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

The reason I discouraged proof-texting verses is confirmed by your copy and pasting verses that have nothing to do with the Second Coming of Christ. It seems to me that much of what preterists find comfort in, is contrasting their beliefs to what futurists believe, thereby creating an illusion of support.
But I and much of the church agree that death was defeated at the cross. And agree that Jesus Christ rules and reigns in His kingdom today. That the body of Christ is the temple of God.

But the reason the church for 2,000 years has been awaiting the Second Coming of Christ is because the church recognizes that it didn't happen in the 1st century either historically or scripturally.

Does it occur to you that being at odds with 2,000 years of core Christian doctrine and scholars might suggest that your understanding of this fundamental of the Second Coming of Christ may be less than sound?

[Peter]

Hi PeteWaldo;

Doesn't that seem like a pretty thin hope by which to pit yourself against 2,000 years of Christian tradition regarding the Second Coming?

Have you ever listened to the TV when someone dies and people talking about that person says, "He/she is up there looking down at us"

The reason I discouraged proof-texting verses is confirmed by your copy and pasting verses that have nothing to do with the Second Coming of Christ.

Which verse did I quote which has nothing to do with MY second coming?

It seems to me that much of what preterists find comfort in, is comparing their beliefs to what futurists believe, thereby creating an illusion of support.

Strange, I se it the other way around. We can ask a so-called futurist for thoughts on thios or that and generally we get a blank screen. Note the thread I started here about the three manifestations of Jesu Christ.... it's not in their study guides, nobody has developed a rationaiztion to deal with it so the masses avoid it in droves!

But I and much of the church agree that death was defeated at the cross.

See, there is another example of the masses being WRONG!

25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death.

Paul wrote that after the cross. Death was abolished by Jesus some time after that:
2 Tim 1
10 but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,

And agree that Jesus Christ rules and reigns in His kingdom today.

Good because He does and has done since 70 AD or earlier.

That the body of Christ is the temple of God.

Whose mail are you reading?
Rev 22
22 I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb are its temple

Don't you like that one?

But the reason the church for 2,000 years has been awaiting the Second Coming of Christ is because the church recognizes that it simply didn't happen in the 1st century either historically or scripturally.

Well, it sure hasn't happened for me yet, but check with Mother Teresa.

Does it occur to you that being at odds with 2,000 years of core Christian doctrine and scholars might suggest that your understanding the fundamental of the Second Coming of Christ is less than sound?

Look again and tell me what scripture my idea contradicts. I'm serious, show me what verse would eliminate my understanding.

[Peter]

That's what the bible says. I don't know of any group who says the comings are totally over with .... but maybe!!!!!

Doesn't that seem like a pretty thin hope by which to pit yourself against 2,000 years of Christian tradition regarding the Second Coming?

Hi PeteWaldo;
Have you ever listened to the TV when someone dies and people talking about that person says, "He/she is up there looking down at us"

That has nothing to do with Christian tradition. More like the words of the unsaved at funerals searching for something kind to say. Let's try it again.

Doesn't the first quote in this post seem like a pretty thin hope by which to pit yourself against 2,000 years of universal Christian doctrine regarding the Second Coming of Christ?

[Peter]

That has nothing to do with Christian tradition. More like the words of the unsaved at funerals searching for something kind to say. Let's try it again.

Doesn't the first quote in this post seem like a pretty thin hope by which to pit yourself against 2,000 years of universal Christian doctrine regarding the Second Coming of Christ?

I missed a sentence from your earlier post:

Where is the historical record of that event?

The coming of the son of man and the resurrections of the dead happe in the unseen to mortals spiritual realm. There are no witnesses and there is no history. Why do you think Jesus can say, " At that time if anybdy says THERE HE IS, it ain't true!"

The witnesses?

There are no witnesses other than John wrote a book about it.... he saw it in the spiritual realm!

How did you catch it while a near unanimity of the church somehow missed it for nearly 2,000 years unto today?

ALl of us know this, it is just a few who wait for a physical return and physical resurrection.

I guess the above covers the rest of your new post. SO isn't it time you started dealing with my verses?

[Peter]

Pret: I missed a sentence from your earlier post:

Pete: Where is the historical record of that event?

Pret: The coming of the son of man and the resurrections of the dead happe in the unseen to mortals spiritual realm.

Gnostics drew the same kinds of conclusions.

Pret: There are no witnesses and there is no history.

Exactly.

Pret: Why do you think Jesus can say, " At that time if anybdy says THERE HE IS, it ain't true!"

Because there will be no opportunity to question, or reason to wonder, when He returns.

Rev 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.

Perhaps the way C.S. Lewis wrote about it will help:

"God is going to invade this earth in force. But what's the good of saying you're on his side then, when you see the whole natural universe melting away like a dream and something else, something it never entered your head to conceive comes crashing in. Something so beautiful to us and so terrible to others that none of us will have any choice left. This time it will be God without disguise; something so overwhelming that it will strike either irresistible love, or irresistible horror into every creature. It will be too late then to choose your side. There is no use saying you choose to lie down, when it's become impossible to stand up. That will not be the time for choosing; it will be the time when we discover which side we really have chosen, whether we realize it or not. Now, today, in this moment, is our chance to choose the right side. God is holding back to give us that chance. It will not last forever; we must take it or leave it."

Maybe you don't think that teaching unique heresy that stands outside of 2,000 years of universal Christian core doctrine doesn't matter.

Hbr 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

Perhaps you believe that contradicting the body of Christ in core doctrine is little more than a form of personal entertainment, since you seem to be devoid of fear and trembling on the matter. But I don't believe the scriptures provide comfort for casually formulating and teaching personal interpretation that is directly contrary to core doctrine:

Jam 3:1 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

And you wouldn't be the first to teach falsely on this matter:

2Ti 2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; 18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

Yet even though a virtual unanimity of the church continue to recognize that the resurrection of the dead is still a future event, you teach "that the resurrection is past already".

Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

You may not be able to plead ignorance henceforth.

Pret: There are no witnesses other than John wrote a book about it.... he saw it in the spiritual realm!

ALl of us know this, it is just a few who wait for a physical return and physical resurrection.

Your efforts to support your heresy have reduced you to falsehood. For 2,000 years universal Christian core doctrine has had Christians forward looking to the resurrection of the dead as well as the Second Coming of Christ - Orthodox, partial-preterist or futurist. Much of the body of Christ even verbally proclaiming it at least once a week.

Pret: I guess the above covers the rest of your new post. SO isn't it time you started dealing with my verses?

That is not only off-topic but you continue to reinforce the futility of doing so.

The reason I discouraged proof-texting verses is confirmed by your copy and pasting verses that have nothing to do with the Second Coming of Christ.

You replied (bolding and enlarging mine, while the all caps "MY" was your doing).

Pret: Which verse did I quote which has nothing to do with MY second coming?

Nor did you answer my question except by obfuscating with unrelated subjects. Having quoted and then avoided the subject and purpose of this thread from your very first post, except for the postscript.

Pret: That's what the bible says. I don't know of any group who says the comings are totally over with .... but maybe!!!!!

To which I inquired and you still haven't answered:

Doesn't that seem like a pretty thin hope by which to pit yourself against 2,000 years of universal Christian core doctrine regarding the Second Coming of Christ?