If you're a
preterist or have any views on preterism
it would be great to hear from you.
Resurrection
- Forum Posts
One
'CBV' advocates will talk a little about Adam, but they will always add something like, "The argument about what MIGHT have happened to Adam had he NOT sinned in the Garden of Eden is a moot point from the standpoint of the fact that the Bible does NOT say what would have happened."
The words "moot point" are used extensively by 'CBV' advocates and making 'reasonable connections' is ONLY allowed if doesn't argue against their theory.
Sadly, the "man of dust" is where 'CBV' begins to slip, slide, and evade, it ends with the "heavenly Man". [ See below. ]
2. The question is this: HAD Adam remained "obedient" would he have continued living in this world forever? (Which is a foolish notion not only because of the indomitable laws of growth and decay (Ps 49:12), but for MANY other reasons; for example, the Sun eventually running out of hydrogen.) Or would he have been "caught up" (harpazō) into Heaven at the end of his "natural" life (Gen 5:5) to continue fellowshipping with God in a realm that neither "moth nor rust" destroys (Matt 6:19-20, Heb 11:10, 16, Rev 2:7)?
If the latter (which is obviously the most sensible option), would ALL of his humanity been "caught up" into Heaven? or only an ASPECT of it? Paul provides the answer for us in 1 Cor 15 (e.g. 1 Cor 15:51-52).
3. When asked what they believe happened to Christ's "bodily" (sōmatikōs) substance (Col 2:9) when He "ascended" into Heaven, 'CBV' advocates will either answer the question with another question, or resort to their standard deflection; "it's a moot point".
"Now when He had spoken these things, WHILE THEY WATCHED, He was TAKEN UP, and a cloud received Him out of their sight.." (Ac 1:9).
'EBV' accepts this in its SIMPLE sense: One moment the LORD was in an "earthly" environment in a "body" (sōma) that needed "natural" means to sustain it (Lk 24:41-42), the next He was "translated" to the "heavenly country" where His "body" (sōma) was described by Paul as "glorious" (Phil 3:21).
'CBV' on the other hand is forced into all manner of evasion here. Hence their questions in response to questions and their "moot point" litany.
4. In relation to Paul's use of the word "changed" (allassō) in 1 Cor 15:21-22, EBV agrees with CBV's definition that one thing was EXCHANGED for another. But 'CBV' advocates will immediately resort to their operatus morandi by spiritualising-away the entire "physical" CONTEXT of 1 Cor 15 by claiming it was all about "exchanging" one "covenant" for another. (And they condemn 'futurists' for ripping scripture out of CONTEXT?)
But please consider the CONTEXT of this, repeat, this, passage.
Paul describes the PHYSICAL "resurrection" of Christ (vs.1-22) and goes on to ask, "with what kind of body (sōma) are the dead ones raised" (vs.35)? Does he then compare "Law" with "grace" as he does elsewhere? Or maybe "righteousness" with "unrighteousness" (which things would be reasonable if contrasting "covenants")? No. He goes on to describe PHYSICAL "grain" (vs.37); the PHYSICAL "flesh" (sarx) of "fish", "birds", and "animals" (vs.39); and the PHYSICAL "bodies" (sōma) of the "sun", "moon" and "stars" (vs.41).
5. Unless the Corinthians were super intelligent (which they weren't; 1 Cor 1:26-27) and could grasp convoluted concepts such as those invented by 'CBV' advocates 2,000 year later, it seems highly unlikely they made any connection between "birds", "fish", and the "moon", and the exchange of "covenants".
We should also note that when Paul wished to speak of the CORPORATE nature of the "new covenant" he simply declared it, "..even when we were dead in trespasses, (He) made us alive TOGETHER with Christ..and raised us up TOGETHER, and made us sit TOGETHER in the heavenly places in Christ.." (Eph 2:5-6).
The Corinthians never had Romans or Ephesians to compare to. Thus, its evident how THEY would have understood Paul's use of the word "body" (sōma) in the CONTEXT of 1 Cor 15. It takes a modern CBV 'scholar' (?) to make scrambled eggs out of such "plain speech".
6. In some concordances the word, apothnēskō ("die"), as used in 1 Cor 15:22, is tagged with the following Robinson's Analytical Code: V-PAI-3P. This stands for, Tense: PRESENT, Voice: Active, Mood: Indicative, Person: third, Number: PLURAL.
Thus, when Paul wrote his letter to the Corinthians God's people (PLURAL) were still "dying" as a result of Adam's "sin" (the "dead ones"; 1 Cor 15:35). This, he said, would continue until "death" was "swallowed up in victory" (1 Cor 15:54).
7. In 1 Cor 15:22 the word, zōopoieō ("shall"), is tagged with: V-FPI-3P. This stands for, Tense: FUTURE, Voice: Passive, Mood: Indicative, Person: third Number: PLURAL.
The FUTURE tense of this word here is why "committees of scholars" all around the world translate it as, "WE shall (FUTURE tense) ALL be made ALIVE". When would they (PLURAL) "ALL be made ALIVE"? A time yet FUTURE; i.e. at the "last trump" (vs.24, 26, 52).
As they had ALREADY received covenantal/spiritual "life" when they first believed (Eph 2:5-6), this CANNOT sensibly be said to refer to the same thing. Notwithstanding, CBV 'scholars' (?) do so.
8. Paul said, "(the body) is sown a natural body (see, vs.37-38 & 40, for how "body"/sōma is used in this passage, repeat, in this passage); it is (being) raised a spiritual body (sōma).." (1 Cor 15:44).
The
"souls" of God's PEOPLE received "life" when they first
believed the message of the Cross (Col 2:12). That which provided their
"souls" with an immediate "covering" (their "essential bodily
substance") received "life" at Christ's "return" (1 Cor
15:22).
Why was it "(being) raised a spiritual body"? Because when INDIVIDUALS
believed the "gospel" each one put his "faith" in a
message with a "promise"; i.e. the "redemption of the body" (sōma),
God's answer to Gen 3:19. A "message" that pointed FORWARD to
Christ's "return" and the "consummation" of God's program of "redemption" —
"For we were saved in this HOPE.." (Rom 8:11, 23-24).To clarify WHEN each one would ACTUALLY be "made alive" and receive his "spiritual body" (sōma), Paul added, "However, the spiritual is NOT first, but the natural, and AFTERWARD (epeita) the spiritual.." (1 Cor 15:46).
Thus, the "souls" of God's PEOPLE received "life" when they first believed the message of the Cross (Col 2:12). That which provided their "souls" with an immediate "covering" (their "essential bodily substance") received "life" at Christ's "return" (1 Cor 15:22). In this way was their "essential humanity" "saved".
9. 'EBV' and 'CBV' agree that what began with the events of the Cross continued throughout the next forty years and were consummated with the events that took place in 70AD. But here is where they differ:
'EBV' believes that those we read of in the NT who put their trust the apostolic "gospel" ALREADY belonged to the "new covenant" and corporate "body of Christ". Thus, they were "new creations" (2 Cor 5:17) who had "passed from death into life" covenantally and spiritually (Jn 5:24, 2 Cor 5:17). There was no need for them to wait for some future time for MORE to be added to this (Rom 8:23-243). [ A truth clearly demonstrated when Paul appeared immediately in the Father's presence after being "caught up" into "Paradise" (Ac 14:19, 2 Cor 12:4). ]
Nevertheless, on account of their failure to grasp passages such as 1 Cor 15 and 1 Thess 4, 'CBV' advocates are forced into believing that MORE did need to be added to God's PEOPLE covenantally/spiritually/corporately at the parousia. The reality is however that all that remained for the "faithful" was that they wait in "HOPE" for the "redemption of their bodies (sōma)" (Rom 8:11, 23, 1 Cor 15:51-52, Phil 3:21, 1 Thess 4:13-17).
10. If the "nature" of that which provided the "souls" of God's people with an immediate "covering" (their "essential bodily substance") was "changed" at the parousia — i.e. "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" properties EXCHANGED (allassō) for "spiritual"/immoral"/"incorruptible" properties — that renewed "nature" would also pass to their posterity. Not only was that "change" profound, it was PERMANENT.
Thus, post-parousia their "essential humanity" would not go down to the "grave" as was the case pre-parousia ("death" having been "swallowed up in victory"; 1 Cor 15:54-55, Rev 20:14), but at the end of their "pilgrimage" in this world they would be "caught up" (harpazō) into the "heavenly country". THERE they would either become "citizens" or "outcasts" in God's "heavenly Kingdom".
[ For the duration of the "second death", compare; Matt 8:12, Rev 14:10-11, 21:8, 22:14-15.) ]
11. [ A note on 'infinity'. ] 'Infinity' has to do with 'time and space'; i.e. with "heaven and earth".
As God transcends both (Deut 10:14, 1 Kin 8:27, 2 Chron 2:6, 6:18, Ps 89:11, 113:4, 115:16, Jer 23:24) He ALREADY knows all that will come to pass both below, AND above in His everlasting, heavenly "Kingdom" (2 Tim 4:18, 2 Pet 1:11).
Thus, if a glorified "saint" was to sing Him a "new song" in some distant future, He ALREADY knows all the words; etc, etc, ad infinity....
12. The first (temporal) "death" was "abolished" for God's PEOPLE at the parousia when Christ's "victory" on the Cross was applied to them (Rev 20:14). But we should remember there was a "resurrection" of BOTH the "just" and the "unjust" (Dan 12:2, Ac 24:15, Jn 5:28-29). Thus, "immortality" does NOT in itself = "salvation" or "holiness".
"Unclean spirits" have "immortality" yet they are NOT "saved" nor are they "holy" (Heb 2:16).
13. Once 'CBV' advocates admit the TRUTH that Christ has the same substance now in "Heaven" as He did on "earth" — SAME substance, DIFFERENT (i.e. "spiritual") properties — and they apply that TRUTH consistently when they read the scriptures, especially 1 Cor 15 (which they REFUSE to put in context), 'CBV' defeats itself.
"And as we have borne the image of the man of DUST (with properties like unto Adam's), we shall ALSO BEAR the image of the HEAVENLY Man (with properties like unto Christ's).." (1 Cor 15:49).
14. 'CBV' errorists will sometimes use the "closed doors" event as if it supports their "moot point" evasion about Christ's current "bodily" (sōmatikōs) state (Jn 20:26). In reality it does the opposite:
On one side of the "closed doors" Jesus' "bodily" (sōmatikōs) substance had "natural" properties. Those properties were then EXCHANGED for "spiritual" ones. He passed through "closed doors" and they returned to their "natural" state (Lk 24:39). [ A similar thing happened on the "holy mount". ]
But notice, in BOTH states ("natural" and "spiritual") Jesus retained the same substance (Matt 17:2, 9). — SAME substance, DIFFERENT properties.
15. If not long, LONG before, and for a multitude of other reasons, the PHYSICAL "earth" is going to "pass away" anyway when the Sun runs out of energy.
Why then do 'CBV' scholars (?) argue with 'futurists' as if 'full-preterism' is inconsistent with an EXACT number of "elect" being "saved"? 'CBV' truly is a system erroneous from top to bottom.
As a 'theory' it may helped certain misguided (unscrupulous?) folk by promoting it for a season, but its time for full-preterists to move on.
[ NB Some argue that God could intervene to stop the Sun from running out of energy. Of course He could. But He hasn't seen fit to replenish it thus far so why should He in the future? For countless "ages" children have died in agony from cancer. God could intervene to stop it, but as He hasn't thus far why should He in the future? ]
Two
We have to carefully examine each position and determine for ourselves which one best accords with scripture, other historical evidence (or lack thereof), and with 'reasoned thought'.
2. One other 'theory' suggests that a "multitude" of "living" people of ALL ages from ALL across the Roman Empire and beyond (Ac 2:9-11) were made "immortal" and raised VISIBLY into the "sky" in 70AD, and an even greater "multitude" of "dead" people were biologically reconstituted and were also raised VISIBLY into the "sky". These "dead ones" were "raised up" from beneath fields, cities, towns, villages, and graveyards, and from underneath temples, houses, community centres, and work places.
Even though when the "body" of one man was "raised up" from "death" in its ENTIRETY it was seen visibly by "hundreds" of people (Mar 16:9, Jn 20:14, 19, 1 Cor 15:4-8), we are told that we "shouldn't be concerned" that NO ONE, ANYWHERE, ever mentioned such an Empire-wide "miracle" because they believe an "inspired" author said it happened in 1 Thess 4. (In the same way that we "mustn't doubt" the Universe is 6,000 years old because some believe an "inspired" author said it is in Gen 1.)
As this 'theory' does not even begin to accord with "reasoned thought", it can be safely discounted.
3. When we open up scripture there are times when we have to make NECESSARY connections.
For example, we do not have the word "dinosaurs" in the OT but does that mean they didn't exist? We do not have the word "bathroom" in the NT and we read NOTHING of Christ needing it, but as He was a man of "flesh and blood" like the rest of us does that mean He never used one? To insist in some sort of gnostic way that He DIDN'T just because we don't find this exact word in the "gospels" or have a CLEAR description of Him using a "bathroom", would be extreme folly. However, because it can have an APPEARANCE of being "sound" the unwary are sometimes tripped-up by this 'blinkered' approach.
Some find this style helpful because when their presuppositions are threatened resorting to it "answers everything". But there are better ways to argue one's position.
4. In 1 Cor 15:51-52 we find Paul referring back to vs.44-46 to explain HOW a "natural (mortal) body" would become a "spiritual (immortal) body" at Christ's "return". It would come about he said by being "changed" (allassō). That is, by having one set of properties that are "natural"/"corruptible"/"mortal" in nature, EXCHANGED for another set of properties that are "spiritual"/"incorruptible"/"immortal" in nature.
All of Paul's contemporaries expected that something was going to happen to those who "slept" (1 Cor 15:35). But the "mystery" he revealed to them was that God's PEOPLE who then lived would not have to "sleep" before they received this "change" in their "bodily" nature. [ And "sleeping" had NOTHING to do with "sleeping" inside the "old covenant" as 'CBV' advocates would twist this to mean. It had to do with "sleeping" in the "dust" (Gen 3:19, Dan 12:2, Jn 11:11, 13). ]:
"Behold, I tell you a MYSTERY: We shall not all SLEEP, but we shall all be CHANGED (allassō), in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet (i.e. on the "last Day" of the OT dispensation, NOT 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years later!). For the trumpet will sound, and the DEAD will be RAISED incorruptible, and WE shall be CHANGED..", "There is a natural body (sōma), and there is a spiritual body (sōma)..However, the spiritual is NOT first, but the natural, and AFTERWARD (epeita) the spiritual.." [ Compare, 1 Cor 15:42, 44, 46, 50-52, Rom 8:11, 23, Phil 3:21. ]
But the crucial question is this: What did it mean for God's PEOPLE to have the "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" properties of their "bodies" (sōma) EXCHANGED (allassō) for "spiritual"/"immoral"/"corruptible" properties whilst they still lived? Did they "ALL" suddenly "vanish" (as some suggest) or did something else occur?
5. Prophesying about the "destruction" OF JERUSALEM (note: OF JERUSALEM), Christ said that, "..unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.." (Matt 24:22, Mk 13:20, Lk 18:8).
Josephus confirmed that countless thousands died in the "holy city" at the hands of Titus (and many others died elsewhere during the "hour of trial"; Rev 3:10). But note: In His "revelation" to John Christ did NOT caution those who lived in Asia (or anywhere else) to "flee to the mountains" BEFORE the "troubles" started. Most of the "elect" in "JUDEA" however (repeat: in "JUDEA") would have heeded His warning (Lk 21:21, Rev 12:6, 17:3).
Obviously those in the "grave" could NOT have "fled" to the "mountains". Thus, they were "raised up" from wherever they had been buried; e.g. from beneath fields, cities, towns, villages, and graveyards, and from under temples, houses, community centres, and places of work.
6. Christ did NOT say that in the "tribulation" that would affect the inhabitants of "JUDEA" (note: of "JUDEA") virtually every Christian throughout the ENTIRE Roman Empire and beyond (and there were large numbers of them; Ac 2:9-11, 13:42-45, 19:8-10, Col 1:23) would be killed. (Which is what some are forced into claiming in order to support their presuppositions.) Thus, many of them MUST have "remained" at His "coming" (1 Cor 15:51-52, 1 Thess 4:13-17).
Given this, is it sensible to claim that each and every one of God's PEOPLE — man, woman, and child — simply "vanished" in 70AD and that NOTHING WHATSOEVER at ANY time was EVER reported about it? Not just by well known historians like Josephus and Tacitus in the West, but by ANYONE, ANYWHERE? Nor did later Christian authors ever mention such a breathtaking, Empire-wide "miracle" that would at least have reached them by word of mouth had it happened.
That some use an "argument from silence" to support the 'Mass Vanishing Act' theory is quite astonishing.
7. Christ and the "apostle and prophets" warned of a coming disaster that would strike the "holy city" such as had never been seen before (Matt 24:21, etc). If such a calamity did strike it, is it reasonable to expect that someone, somewhere, made a record of it? Yes. And so they did.
But some claim it's also reasonable for another, Empire-wide event to have taken place at the SAME time — which unlike the sacking of a localised "city" had never been seen before — and for NO ONE, ANYWHERE, ever to have mentioned it?
Surely, this is too much of a stretch.
8. To argue that a mass "vanishing"/"disappearing" act occurred in 70AD is true folly. And to say that external testimonies of such an incredible "miracle" aren't needed because ALL of God's PEOPLE must have "vanished" because "that's what I think 1 Thess 4 says", only adds to this folly. These kind of claims are indicative of an approach that CANNOT be reasoned with.
The mass "vanishing"/"disappearing" act theory may satisfy those whose ENTIRE eschatological paradigm could fall to pieces otherwise (the 'Israel Only' errorists for example), but it doesn't satisfy everyone. In fact, it could be argued that believing such an astounding "miracle" occurred in 70AD that NO ONE ever spoke of is a superstition on par with believing that the ENTIRE Universe is no more than 6,000 years old because, "that's what I believe Gen 1 says."
Sadly BOTH ends of scripture are subject to the greatest abuse. [ See, 'Genesis' for a 'sensible' discussion of this book. ]
9. The best some have for supporting the 'Mass Vanishing Act' theory and the failure of ANYONE, ANYWHERE, ever to mention it, is this:
Contrary to the evidence (and to commonsense!), EVERY city, town, village, street, and alleyway, and EVERY community, work place, family, and household, from Mesopotamia to Rome and beyond (Ac 2:9-11), were so devastated by "war" that no one took much notice when a whole bunch of family members, friends and work collogues suddenly "vanished" from their midst.
This, they say, is the reason why no-one EVER mentioned it or recorded such an Empire-wide "miracle".
But when we consider than many of the advocates of this superstition are utterly convinced that the ENTIRE Universe is no more than 6,000 years old it's not surprising that they would also believe something as outrageous as this.
10. A GREAT number of Christians lived throughout the Roman Empire (and beyond) pre-70AD — not just the hundred or so who are named in the NT (Ac 2:9-11). Yet serious errors crept into the "churches" even under the noses of inspired "ministers" (1 Cor 5:1, 2 Tim 2:18, Gal 5:11-12, etc).
But do we have historical evidence (letters and such) that ANY but God's inspired "ministers" strove to set the record straight? No. Why then do some think it strange that the same Christians wrote NO letters pre-parousia and who "lived" through it, should suddenly start writing letters post-parousia?
Given this, is it any wonder that by the time Papias, Polycarp, and Ignatius began writing 40 or so years later in a region where errors started taking root decades before (Rev 2:4, 14-15, 20, 3:1, 15-17) and when there were NO inspired "ministers" left to challenge them, that confusion abounded (sacramentology, ecclesiology, second coming, etc)? And the world is only to aware of what happens when religious errors start being passed from father-to-son.
Thus, there is no need for any 'Mass Vanishing Act' theory to account for the so-called post-parousia "silence".
11. In the 'Book of Revelation' we read of a "vision" being given to John of Israel, God's "servant" (Ex 19:6, Lev 25:55), "inheriting" the "land" a "second time" through "great tribulation". That is, the "heavenly country" from which they would NEVER be "plucked up" (Isa 61:7, Eze 28:25, 36:24, 28, 37:12-13, 21, 25, Jer 30:3, 32:41, Amos 9:15, Heb 11:10, 16).
In the "vision" we are told that the Israelites were EXACTLY "numbered" and that EXACT "number" was figuratively given as 144,000 (Rev 7:4-8). [ If you cherry-pick such texts in 'Revelation' and claim this "number" is literal, the entire 'Book' becomes a nonsense. ] Then, "after" (meta tauta) the EXACT number of Israelites is given, we are told of a "great multitude which NO ONE COULD NUMBER" praising God (Rev 7:9-10).
In other words, we are told of a separate group of worshippers. That is, those who had "joined themselves" to the "saints" throughout the "ages" and had become their fellow "servants" in the "House of God" (Isa 14:1-2, 19:24-25, 56:6-8, 60:3-5, Ruth 1:16, Est 8:17, Jer 12:15-16, Zech 2:11, 8:22-23, Ac 15:16-17, etc).
12. For reference, here are some of the cities/regions where Christians could be found during the apostolic generation:
Libya, Egypt, Arabia, Mesopotamia, Parthia, Medes, Elam, Israel, Cappadocia, Pontus, Bithynia, Galatia, Phrygia, Pamphylia, Rome, Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea, Philippi, Macedonia, Colosse, Cyrene and Crete.
Setting aside the question of the "multitudes" of "unjust" adamic descendants for the moment (Matt 10:28, Rev 19:20, 20:15), that anyone would claim that EVERY Christian who "remained" at the parousia suddenly "vanished" from ALL of these places when the "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" properties of their "bodies" (sōma) were EXCHANGED (allassō) for "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" ones in the "twinkling of an eye" (1 Cor 15:44, 46, 51-52) and no-one, ANYWHERE, ever mentioned it, is hard to imagine.
But alas, this is EXACTLY what some do claim.
13. The only alternative that takes account of ALL the evidence is that what the Spirit "changed" at the parousia (Rom 8:11, 23) must have been, NOT the entire "bodily" substance of God's PEOPLE, but an ASPECT of it.
This would also account with what would have happened to God's PEOPLE had Adam not "sinned". [ See below. ]
But what ASPECT of their "bodily" substance could have been "changed"?
14. What if, when God "fashions" a man's "inward parts" (Ps 139:13-14), FROM his "bodily" substance He also "fashions" an immediate "covering" for his "soul"? in the SAME way as He "fashions" an immediate "covering" for EVERYTHING else in him?
But is such a thing feasible? Well, if we would argue that its not we have to be ready to answer this question:
Why would God "clothe" all the countless features of our humanity with their "own" IMMEDIATE "coverings" but leave out His greatest work — our "souls"? Do we truly believe that this ALONE is left "naked" (2 Cor 5:1-4)?
[ There is also the question of what happened to Christ's "bodily" (sōmatikōs) substance when He "ascended" (Ac 1:9, Col 2:9). (More later.) ]
But if He does so "cover" our "souls" what could this "covering" consist of?
15. What about a our "essential bodily substance"? something that ALL "living creatures" have and which is unique to its "kind" (Gen 1:11-12, 21, 24-25, 6:20, 7:14)? A "substance" that permeates the ENTIRETY of our physicality. Could this be it?
If so, this could account for the kind of language found in places like, Job 19:26, Ps 16:9 and Eze 37:1-14, because when the "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" properties of this "essential bodily substance" were EXCHANGED (allassō) for "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" properties at the parousia, the "bodies" (sōma) of God's people truly were "redeemed" from the "bondage of corruption" and given "life" (Rom 8:11, 21-23).
16. As to the true meaning of "redemption": When a slave is "redeemed" for money his slavery is EXCHANGED (allassō) for freedom (Ex 21:30). Yet the same man is present both before, and after, the EXCHANGE.
Thus, the "bodies" of God's PEOPLE were "redeemed" when the "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" properties of their "essential bodily substance" — that which provides the "soul" with an immediate "covering" — were "freed" form the "bondage of corruption" (Rom 8:11, 21-23) when they were EXCHANGED (allassō) for "spiritual"/"immortal"/"spiritual" properties (1 Cor 15:44, 46, 51-52). But the substance remained the same BOTH before, and after, the EXCHANGE. — Same substance, different properties.
Unlike the 'Immortal Body at Death' view ('IBD'), the 'Essential Body View' ('EBV') supports the biblical doctrine that a true "redemption" took place. Not only so, but it took place in a single "moment" on the "last Day" of the OT dispensation (1 Cor 15:51-52), not 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years later.
17. If the LORD does provide a man's "soul" with its OWN immediate "covering" in the way suggested by 'EBV' (i.e. with his "essential bodily substance") and what happened at Christ's "return" related solely to "changing" its "nature" within God's PEOPLE — both "living" and "dead", "just and unjust" (Dan 12:2, Jn 5:28-29, Ac 24:15, 1 Thess 4:13-17) — this would NOT have been observable by ordinary sight (Lk 17:20).
This would help explain why the "beast" and "false prophet" were "cast alive" into the "lake of fire" (Rev 19:10) and it also help us understand the meaning of Matt 10:28; "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy BOTH soul AND body in geenna.."
It would also shed light on the post-parousia confusion of those who believed the "resurrection" was yet future — and confusion over the "resurrection" was NOT a new thing (2 Tim 2:18) — because many expected it to be an EXACT replica of Christ's "resurrection" but on a larger scale.
[ Confusion over the NATURE of Christ's second "coming" is related to the confusion that existed over the NATURE of His first "coming". One that gets passed from father-to-son. ]
18. In addition to Paul's teaching in 1 Cor 15:51-52, its not hard to imagine why Jesus was the ONLY one who needed to have the properties of His ENTIRE "bodily" substance "changed" at His "ascension". If so much as a strand of His hair had remained in this world untold misery would have ensued. (Consider what's STILL happening over a few blocks of stone!)
When it comes to the doctrine of the "resurrection" Jesus was indeed "the exception to the rule" because He was unique. For example, NO ONE else was "chosen" by God to be the substitutionary "sacrifice" for His PEOPLE; only He died vicariously in the stead of others (Matt 10:28, 26:28, Ac 20:28, Eph 1:7, Col 1:14, 1 Pet 1:18-19, etc). Only Jesus was the promised "Seed" (Gen 3:16, Gal 3:16). Only Jesus was born of a "virgin" (Matt 1:20, 23). Only Jesus was the "last adam" who became a "life-giving spirit" (1 Cor 15:45). In many, MANY ways was Christ unique.
Those who expected the "last Day" "resurrection" to EXACTLY mirror His had not fully considered these things. And so, as is EVER the case, "confusion" led to "error", "error" was taught as "truth", and this "truth" became a "creed" (Ac 7:51, 19:34, Col 2:8, 1 Pet 1:18).
19. We know it was not God's will for the "souls" of His PEOPLE to appear before Him "naked" in the "heavenly country" (2 Cor 5:1-4).
Receiving a "body" (sōma) that had "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" properties (1 Cor 15:44, 46) was therefore a necessity because "flesh and blood" in its "natural" state could NOT provide this (1 Cor 15:50): a "change"/"transformation" was needed (Phil 3:21). Thus, Paul's "revelation" in 1 Cor 15:51-52.
Given what he said was required before a man could receive "life" and "inherit the Kingdom", we can work back to a time before "sin entered the world" (Rom 5:12) and make a 'reasonable connection' between what Paul "revealed" WOULD soon happen to God's PEOPLE at the "end" of the OT dispensation, and what WOULD have happened to them had Adam not "sinned" at its "beginning".
20. We read that only IF Adam "sinned" would he "die" (Gen 2:17). Thus, he already HAD "immortality". Does that mean he would have lived in the Middle East "forever" had remained "obedient"? No. But if his "body" already HAD "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" properties does that mean he was "invisible"? How then could he have obeyed God's command to, "be fruitful and multiply" (Gen 1:28)?
Logically then this suggests that "immortality" only applied to an ASPECT his "bodily" substance. As suggested earlier, his "essential bodily substance" — that which provided his "soul" with an immediate "covering". Thus, when "full of days" (Gen 5:5) Adam's "essential humanity" (i.e. his "soul" and its immediate "covering") would have CONTINUED to have "access" to the "heart of God" (symb. the "Tree of Life") in His "heavenly Kingdom" and would not have gone down to the "grave" (cf. Rev 2:7).
His "spiritual" nature would also have passed to his "children, and to his children's children" (Gen 5:3), which, unless a "multitude" of people actually DID "vanish" in 70AD, must have been what started happening at the parousia when "death" was "swallowed up in victory" (1 Cor 15:54-55, Rev 20:14). [ Isa 66:22, Jer 30:18-20, 32:39, 33:22, Eze 37:25-26, Joel 3:20, Eph 2:7, 3:21. ]
21. In summary: At Christ's "return" all that was ESSENTIAL to those who "slept" in the "dust" was "changed"/"raised up". And all that was ESSENTIAL to those who "remained" was "changed"/"caught up", each in their "own order" at the end of their "pilgrimage" in this world (1 Cor 15:23, 1 Thess 4:13-17).
Three
But did that refer to the ENTIRETY of their "bodily" substance, or only an ASPECT of it?
2. In 1 Cor 15 Paul revealed the "mystery" that the "nature" of those ready to be "raised up"/"caught up" would soon be "changed" (allassō) [1 Cor 15:51-52]. A necessity given the environment God's PEOPLE were destined to spend the "ages of the ages"; i.e. in the "air"/"clouds" (1 Thess 4:17, 2 Tim 4:18, Heb 11:16).
Thus, the "bodily" substance that provided their "souls" with an immediate "covering" — their "essential bodily substance", NOT their entire "bodily" substance — would have its "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" properties EXCHANGED (allassō) for "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" properties. For those who "remained" at Christ's "return" that meant this "covering" did NOT "return" to "dust" with the rest of their "flesh" (they did "NOT all sleep"; 1 Cor 15:51), but continued to "cover" their "souls"; first in this world, then in the next (2 Cor 5:1-4, Rev 2:7).
And so the Edenic "promise" was fulfilled — "death" was "swallowed up in victory" and God's PEOPLE "inherited" the "Kingdom" (Gen 3:15, 19, Matt 25:34, 1 Cor 15:54-55, Rev 13:8).
3. "First" came the "natural" — when their "essential bodily substance" had Properties like unto the "man of dust" ("mortal"/"corruptible"), then, at Christ's "return", came the "spiritual" — when that "substance" was "transformed" by receiving properties like unto the "heavenly Man" ("immortal"/"incorruptible") [1 Cor 15:44, 46-47, Phil 3:21].
And being "spiritual" in nature and a "work" of the Spirit (Rom 8:11, 23), the "resurrection"/"change" — which occurred in a "moment", NOT at some later time when the "pilgrimage" of those who "remained" came to an end, which for new believers could have been 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, years later!) — would NOT have been observable by ordinary sight (Lk 17:20). Christ "returned" on the "last Day" of the OT dispensation (Jn 6:39-40, 44, 54, 11:24), when the "LAST trumpet" sounded, and the "resurrection"/"change" was a SINGLE event that occurred at that VERY "moment" (1 Cor 15:52). Thus, only by doing violence to certain scriptures can 'IBD' be made to work.
[ 'IBD' also fails to grasp the biblical doctrine of "redemption". There MUST be continuity of substance between what God's PEOPLE had on earth, and what they had in Heaven, for true "redemption" to have taken place. ]
4. Christ was the "firstfruits" of the "resurrection" — who, for necessary reasons had to have the ENTIRETY of His "bodily" (sōmatikōs) substance (Col 2:9) "changed" at His "ascension" (if so much as a strand of His hair had remained this world untold misery would have ensued) — "then" came the "harvest" when He "returned" at the "end" of the OT dispensation to "gather in" God's PEOPLE, "each" in his "own order" (Ac 26:23, 1 Cor 15:20, 23-24).
For those who "remained" that meant that when they had finished their "pilgrimage" in this world, "then" (epeita; 1 Thess 4:17) they were "caught up" to be "together" with those who had been "raised up" from their "sleep".
5. 'EBV' takes account of the ENTIRE revelation of scripture and applies 'commonsense' to both pre and post biblical events.
It removes any need for 'full preterists' to spiritualise-away things like edenic events (Gen 2:17, 3:19), Christ's "ascension" (Ac 1:9), and the "resurrection" of the "dead ones" (1 Cor 15:35).
Unless we can provide a CREDIBLE account for a "resurrection" occurring on the "last Day" of the OT dispensation (70AD) that includes a "resurrection" of individual "bodies" (sōma), we CANNOT call ourselves consistent 'full preterists'.
This is why systems like 'CBV', 'IBD', and the mass 'Vanishing Act' theory, have been tried and found wanting.
Four
The "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" properties of his "body" (sōma), would need, he said, to be EXCHANGED (allassō) for "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" ones (1 Cor 15:44, 46, 51-53).
Thus, once the Spirit had "completed" this "work" at Christ's "return" (Rom 8:11, 23) his 'essential humanity' would not go down to the "grave" but rather be "caught up" (harpazō) to "glory" at the end of his "pilgrimage" in this world, thereby "death" would be "swallowed up in victory" (1 Cor 15:54; cf. Rev 20:14).
2. That which provided Christ's "soul" with an immediate "covering" (His "essential bodily substance") ALREADY had an "immortal" nature, even as ALL men have and as Adam had before he "sinned".
[ 'EBV' argues that it is inconceivable that God DOES create an "immortal soul" within a perishable "pot of clay" (1 Pet 2:24, Ps 49:12; cf. Ecc 3:11, Ps 49:12, Matt 10:28), but does NOT create an "immortal covering" for it.
3. Christ was born of a "virgin" and so He wasn't polluted by Adam's "sin". (Even as ancient Aborigines, Britons, Chinese, Africans, Indians, etc, weren't.) For Adam's fallen posterity (Rom 5:12) only by believing in the holy "Seed" could "life" be restored to THEM: "In Him was life.." (Jn 1:4, 5:26, 6:48, 11:25, 14:6, Ac 3:15).
But if the "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" properties of the rest of His "bodily" (sōmatikōs) substance (Col 2:9) were EXCHANGED (allassō) at His "ascension" for "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" properties (1 Cor 15:44, 46, 51-53), He would no longer be in the "days of His flesh" (Heb 5:7). And after receiving a glorious/spiritual "body" from God (1 Cor 15:45, Phil 3:21) that had the SAME substance, but DIFFERENT properties, nor would He appear as a man of "flesh" (Ac 9:3-7, 1 Cor 15:8, 45).
4. There are no convoluted modern concepts in the 'EBV' view. Nothing "pseudo-metaphysical" or "gnostic". Just a straightforward interpretation of the data presented to us (Ac 1:9, Col 2:9, Eph 5:30, and especially 1 Cor 15) mixed with God-given commonsense (Ac 1:9, Col 2:9, Eph 5:30). Heaven is "spiritual" in nature (2 Tim 4:18), and so the "bodies" (sōma) of God's people needed to be "spiritual" in nature (1 Cor 15:44, 46).
Nor is there any need for CBV 'scholars' (?) to "help" out (?) by copying and pasting letters church members like the Corinthians never had (Romans and Ephesians, etc) and FORCING them into a passage like 1 Cor 15 in order to make it 'fit'.
3. The SIMPLE explanation Paul gave as to what was needed before a man of "flesh and blood" could "inherit" God's "heavenly Kingdom" (1 Cor 15:50), is in stark contrast to 'CBV' evasions on the subject.
For example, you will often hear something like this from one of its advocates; "What happened to Christ's 'bodily' substance when He ascended to the Father? I don't know. And I don't PRESUME to know because a 'cloud' hid Him. Thus, it's is a MOOT point." ?????
The question is do those who "don't know" what happened to the "holy" body the Father "prepared" in the virgin's "womb" when He returned to the One who "prepared" it (Matt 1:18-20, Ac 1:9, Heb 10:5), actually preach "another" Jesus? or "another gospel"? or a "damnable heresy"?
No. But sadly this is what 'CBV' advocates often accuse 'futurists' of.
4. 'CBV' advocates also struggle to keep their 'theory' alive when they come to debating Col 2:9 with 'futurists'. They think that by ripping this verse out of CONTEXT (as is their forté and modus operandi) and striving to compare it to other verses in Colossians (Col 2:16-17, 19, etc), that 'CBV' is established. The reality is their interpretation of Col 2:9 — which makes Christ's "bodily" (sōmatikōs) substance both "shadow" and substance at the SAME time! — establishes the opposite. Notice:
In Col 2:16-17, 19, etc, Paul CONTRASTS spiritual "shadows" (which were found in foods, feasts, etc) with the spiritual "substance"/"body" (which is found "in" Christ). In Col 2:9 Paul makes no such contrasts. He SIMPLY declares, "For in (Christ) dwells all the fullness of the Godhead BODILY (sōmatikōs).." (Col 2:9).
From this SIMPLE truth he moves on to contrast OT "shadows" with what it meant to be in "covenant" union with Christ; e.g. salvation, redemption, forgiveness, reconciliation, wisdom, knowledge, life, righteousness, fruits of the Spirit, fellowship with the Father, etc. It takes a CBV 'scholar' (?) countless pages to confuse such basic "principles".
5. When 'CBV' advocates are able to provide ONE credible theory — without endless evasions — as what they believe happened to Christ's "bodily"(sōmatikōs) substance when He ascended (Ac 1:9, Col 2:9), maybe then they could be taken a little more seriously.
The SIMPLE truth is that the "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" nature of Christ's "bodily" (sōmatikōs) substance was EXCHANGED (allassō) for a "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" nature when He "returned" to the Father. And in THIS "glorious body"/sōma (Phil 3:21) He "returned" in "Judgement" exactly when scripture said He would — when the "power of the holy people" was "completely shattered" (Dan 12:7).
As we all know, this happened when Titus sacked Jerusalem in 70AD. [ Some of us have seen the 'Arch of Titus' that still stands in Rome as a commemoration to Titus' campaigns; e.g. his destruction of the "holy city". ]
Five
'EBV' argues that the SAME is true for that which provides it with an immediate "covering", which also is "spiritual" in nature.
2. After Jesus "rose from the dead" God could have sustained His "body" DIRECTLY if He'd wished without "natural" means. But whilst He was in the "days of His flesh" and lived in a "natural" (as opposed to "spiritual") environment (Heb 5:7) that is not what happened:
"But while they still did not believe for joy, and marvelled, (Jesus) said to them, 'Have you any FOOD here?' So they gave Him a piece of a broiled FISH and some HONEYCOMB. And He took it and ATE in their presence.." (Lk 24:41-42).
Does anyone seriously believe that the properties of Christ's "bodily" (sōmatikōs) substance are the same NOW at the "right hand of God" in Heaven as they were when they needed such "natural" means to sustain them on earth?
Sadly there are people who believe this and they use this error as the basis for claiming that ALL believers will get the entirety of their physical bodies back as some point in the future.
3. Paul said that Adam was a "man of DUST" but that Christ had become a "life-giving SPIRIT" (1 Cor 15:45, 47). Does that meant Christ no longer had a "body" (sōma)? No. Consider what environment Christ dwells in now and compare texts like Ac 1:9 and Phil 3:21 and read them in their simple 'sense'. That is, in any 'sense' OTHER than how 'CBV' advocates read/twist them.
Paul taught that God's PEOPLE would receive a "spiritual" nature "like" Christ's when the "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" properties of their "bodies" (sōma) were EXCHANGED (allassō) at His "return" and made "like" His (Phil 3:21). That is, made "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" (1 Cor 15:44, 46, 51-53). That was the only way he said that a man of "flesh and blood" could "inherit the Kingdom of God" (1 Cor 15:50):
"It is sown a NATURAL body (with properties like unto the "man of dust"), it is raised a SPIRITUAL body (with properties like unto the "heavenly Man"). There is a NATURAL body (sōma), and there is a SPIRITUAL body (sōma)..However, the SPIRITUAL is not first, but the NATURAL, and AFTERWARD the SPIRITUAL..", "Behold, I tell you a mystery: WE (those Paul wrote to) shall not all sleep ("return" to "dust"), but WE (same people) shall all be CHANGED (allassō)—in a MOMENT, in the TWINKLING of an eye, at the LAST trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the DEAD will be RAISED incorruptible (from the "dust"), and WE (same people) shall be CHANGED.." (1 Cor 15:44, 46, 48, 51-52; cf. 1 Thess 4:13-17).
4. The "redemption" of their "bodies" (sōma) was the "end" of their "hope" and it was something that Christ and His apostles stirred up the "faithful" to "EAGERLY wait" for:
"Not only that, but WE (those Paul wrote to) also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even WE ourselves groan within ourselves, EAGERLY WAITING for the adoption, the redemption of OUR body (sōma). For WE (same people) were saved in this HOPE..", "..so that YOU (those Paul wrote to) come short in no gift, EAGERLY WAITING for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ..", "For WE (those Paul wrote to) through the Spirit EAGERLY WAIT for the HOPE of righteousness by faith.." (Rom 8:23, 1 Cor 1:7, Gal 5:5; cf. Matt 10:23, 24:42, Lk 21:28, Rom 8:11, 19, 23-25, Phil 3:20, Heb 9:28).
5. Now, as history is COMPLETELY silent about a "multitude" of "dead ones" being "raised up" from the "dust" in 70AD with the same properties as the ones they had when they were "sown" into the "dust", we can accept Paul's teaching in its SIMPLE sense when he said that: "..what you sow, you do not sow that body (sōma) that SHALL be..", "..the SPIRITUAL ("body") is not first, but the NATURAL, and afterwards the SPIRITUAL.." (1 Cor 15:37, 46).
And as there are NO reports either of a "multitude" of people suddenly "vanishing" all across the Roman Empire and beyond at the parousia (Ac 2:9-11), its reasonable to conclude that what was "raised up"/"changed" was not the ENTIRE bodily substance of God's PEOPLE, but an aspect of it; i.e. that which provided their "souls" with an immediate "covering".
6. We read that ONLY "if" Adam "sinned" would he "die" (Gen 2:17). Not that the outer "husk" of his physicality (his "perishable bodily substance") wouldn't have naturally decayed anyway (otherwise we'd now have a 6,000 year-old man living in the Middle East!), but had he remained "obedient" (Rom 5:19) that which provided his "soul" with an immediate "covering" (his "essential bodily substance") would have RETAINED its "immortal" nature.
But his "disobedience" caused it to become "natural"/"mortal"/"corruptible" and it was condemned to "return" to "dust" with his "perishable bodily substance" (Gen 3:19). Nevertheless, the promise of a "Seed" was given to him (Gen 3:15) and in the "fullness of time" that "Seed" came and undid Adam's "condemnation" by His substitutionary sacrifice on the Cross (Rom 5:16-18) and His "victory" was applied to God's people in its FULLNESS when He "returned" on the "last day" of the OT dispensation:
"For OUR citizenship (those Paul wrote to) is in Heaven (note: "in Heaven", not "on earth"; cf. 1 Thess 4:17), from which WE (same people) EAGERLY WAIT for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform OUR (same people) LOWLY body (sōma) that it may be conformed to His GLORIOUS body (sōma).." (Phil 3:20-21).
7. 'EBV' argues that its inconceivable that God DOES create an "immortal soul" within a perishable "pot of clay" — "ALL flesh is as grass, and ALL the glory of man as the flower of the grass. The grass WITHERS, and its flower falls away..", "..man, though in honour, does NOT remain; He is like the beasts that perish.." (1 Pet 2:24, Ps 49:12; cf. Ecc 3:11, Ps 49:12, Matt 10:28) — but that He does NOT create an "immortal covering" for it. That is, He allows a man's "soul" to remain "naked" when it leaves its perishable "earthen vessel" to begin its pilgrimage in the endless "ages" of the world "above" (2 Cor 5:1-4).
Thus, 'EBV' proposes that a man's "soul" has ALWAYS had an "immortal covering"; one that God "fashions" from his "essential bodily substance" (Ps 139:13) and that it has the SAME "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" properties as his "soul".
8. 'EBV' further argues that if God was capable of "changing" the nature of Christ's ENTIRE "bodily" substance at His "ascension — if so much as a strand of Christ's hair had remained in this world untold misery would have ensued (consider what the religious STILL do over a few blocks of stone, relics, pieces of bread, etc) — and made it meet for the "heavenly country" (Ac 1:9, 1 Cor 15:45, Phil 3:21), He was more than capable of "changing" an ASPECT of it within His people.
'EBV' also argues that it is not consistent for people to claim on the one hand they have a "soul" dwelling within them that has "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" properties, but on the other to claim its NOT possible for any other ASPECT of their humanity to have "spiritual"/"immortal"/"incorruptible" properties.
NOR is it consistent for people to believe that God "fashions" their COUNTLESS "inward parts" to have their own immediate "coverings" (Ps 139:13-14), but that He leaves out His greatest "work" from having one — their "souls". That this ALONE remains "naked" when this ALONE is "immortal" is highly unlikely (2 Cor 5:1-4).
9. The 'EBV' paradigm is consistent with the time-texts, the biblical doctrine of "redemption", with other internal data (1 Cor 15, 1 Thess 4, etc), and with external data (e.g. the 'so-called' post-parousia 'silence').
It is urged therefore that you consider it well.
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT
ME WITH YOUR VIEWS. MANY THANKS TO THOSE WHO HAVE ALREADY DONE SO.
If you're a preterist or have any views on preterism it would be great to hear from you.
Back to Top
