You are hereTruthvoice / Subversion '09 Autopsy

Truthvoice / Subversion '09 Autopsy

  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 842.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_argument::init() should be compatible with views_handler::init(&$view, $options) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_argument.inc on line 745.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 589.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 589.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter_boolean_operator::value_validate() should be compatible with views_handler_filter::value_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter_boolean_operator.inc on line 149.

By Virgil - Posted on 11 May 2009

Okay, so now that TV / Subversion '09 is over, what are the thoughts, feelings, comments from people about this conference? One said "it was the best conference ever." Another said about David Curtis session on "ages" - In the 7 years, this was Dave's best presentation, and Don Stoner said he loved Jack Scott's session on Corporate Resurrection on 1 Cor. 15.With lots of new faces in the audience, I am sure...this HAD to be the best conference we've had so far. Great attendance, great people and conversations, and as usual, great puns flying back and forth between the Calvinist folks and the non-Calvinists. It was all done in great fun anyways :)

On May 14 the Beyond Creation Science conference took place; this was something organized and directed by Tim Martin and Jeff Vaughn. Don Stoner, the author of A New Look at an Old Earth spoke and his knowledge on any given topic is amazing. Don could read egyptian hieroglyphs in real time off the power point slides and could go through a human genome printout to explain mutations - amazing...simply amazing. In fact, I invited Don to come and speak at the 2010 conference and for now, he agreed and said yes :)

Sam Frost opened up with his session on Gordon Clark and Postmodernism; after 30 minutes my head hurt - that dude is smart...he knows his philosophy. This doesn't mean I agree with everything he is saying, but certainly, a God-centered determinism is nothing short of awe-inspiring. Unfortunately I had to skip Bill Spears' session; this was because the night before I decided to have an introductory session titled "What Happened in A.D. 70?" Way too many people told me that there was little to no introductory material presented. Considering that the whole thing was impromptu, I think it turned out well-enough. It eventually became a round-table conversation, which was my goal to begin with. Almost everyone present had something to say, including Don Stoner. His observation regarding the Temple becoming a symbol for "sin" was excellent - I had to re-think the issue and tell him instead that animal sacrifices became the symbol for sin, not just the Temple building. Thank you for setting me straight Don. :)

Another fascinating presentation was Jeff Carter's history of the Salvation Army and the hymns we sang with him. Very cool stuff! There was a lot I did not know about the Salvation Army, and the story of William Booth and his heart for helping others was really encouraging.

Linda Tate caused quite a stir with her presentation, which was quite interesting. Linda has a very generous heart and she is very passionate about "sinners" who have been ignored and marginalized by the Church for so long.

Dave Curtis was as usual, very good. I did not see his first session, but I did get to see the Transformation of the Ages - talk about power. It has to be the most convincing presentation on the topic I have ever seen! I highly respect Dave and if there is an authority on covenant eschatology, he is the guy.

Jack Scott had just a mind-blowing, brain-frying, hair-raising session on the Corporate Resurrection based on 1 Cor. 15. He had to split it in two because of the quantity of content, but no worries - both sessions were recorded and they will all be online asap. Since so many people get stuck on the resurrection issue when it comes to "preterist" eschatology, now you no longer have any excuses...sorry. Jack and Sam also participated in a conversation with Dale Robinson - they covered eternal conscious torment, the nature and existence of Satan and a few other more "controversial" topics. I loved their interaction.

Another great session was Mick Denen's Great Syncretism - he showed how the church is emerging into a new kind of Kingdom-centered entity, and how our lives are greatly affected by what we believe in relation to the Kingdom of God; his presentation actually tied pretty well with my own Kingdom Politics: Subversive Emergent Eschatology, which I hope people appreciated.

Tim Martin spoke on Saturday on the Promised Land of Lot - another paradigm shift coming from Tim - if he keeps doing this every year, we are going to have problems because he'll have to outdo himself every time. I hope he can. This would be a good time to also say that Tim Martin has been a very real influence in my life and has really prompted me to reconsider the implications of living in the Kingdom in relation to politics and family life - he is partially responsible for our family's journey towards a debt-free living.

Julie Bogart had a powerful session on Bonhoeffer's Letters from Prison - she explained Bonhoeffer's vision for a "religion-less Christianity" and his own reasons for being involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler. Julie talked about her own life and the issues she is facing, and how she found the kind of Christianity she needs in a black inner city church in Cincinnati.

The highlight for me was the keynote conversation between Dr. James Bielo and Fred DeFalco. I loved listening to both of them - Fred shared some of his background, growing up in Baltimore and his own desire for a world in need of healing. Dr. Bielo shared his take on the Emergent Church as an anthropologist, how his own life changed as a result of his interaction with Emergent Christians, and ultimately blew my mind with a graph or diagram he drew during dinner at the hotel bar: a Kingdom-centered world with critical issues like health, art, science and peace flowing out of the Kingdom of God. It was nearly identical to the last slide used in my own presentation, yet we never spoke or talked about it...not even in passing. Creepy? I don't think so - God works through his people, and I believe that in his sovereignty he is creating a new awareness and understanding of the Kingdom in many hearts, everywhere.

One after another, the sessions were fantastic. More than once things brought me to tears and as I was looking around me Saturday night at dinner, it was heart-warming to see all these people with so many backgrounds, and with so many diverse theological opinions sitting together, communing in Christ, laughing and sharing their lives with each other...not according to the few things they disagreed on, but based on the many things they all have in common. I've met folks from all over the place, some driving for hours to get here. In many ways the real face to face fellowship, hallway conversations and exchanges were more important than the presentations given by the speakers, so yes, I am already thinking and hoping for next year. I so much appreciate all you guys and gals coming! Words are beyond description - we cannot describe the fellowship, strength and kindness showed by everyone attending and speaking at those events. Thank you all!

If you did not come, you missed out :) Maybe we can see you next year.

Click here to see a series of pictures taken during the Beyond Creation Science conference and TruthVoice / Subversion '09 - most of them were taken with an iPhone, which does not do well in low light, so apologies for some of the poor quality pictures.

If you took pictures as an attendees, please email me the originals so I can add them to the collection!

Reformer's picture

Dear Virgil,

I'm surprised nobody has challenged you on the terminology you are using to promote your upcoming conference.

So I will.

Why are you posturing/positioning yourself, your conference, and your position as "subversion" and your presenters as "conspirators" . . . not to mention your attempt to claim credibility by claiming Jesus as a co-"conspirator" ???

Is not this a self-marginalizing of yourself and those who agree with you ???

Moreover, how do you think you can be an effective voice in the major debate(s) with this approach ???

Surely you know that if you ever attain a credible/threatening status that your opponents will use material against you in a major way to discredit you and dismiss anything and everything you are saying ???

You you not care ???

Perplexed ???

John Noe

Barry's picture

Quote:
So please join us in this conspiracy of love for the Kingdom , for God and for mankind and help us transform relationships, communities and families.
End quote.

Quote:
Jesus was a provocateur and came to present the Kingdom of God in a light which was dramatically different than the expectations of His contemporaries. His message was subversive and often conpiratorial in nature; this is often what attracted the apostles to Him and what prompted average people to stop, ask questions and be amazed at the answers given by Christ.
End quote.

Hey John,
One thing is for sure, I don't speak for Virgil. [In fact I'm somewhat tolerated here, if you get my drift.]

Honestly I do not, speaking for myself, see the problem with the above quotes.
Is it the term itself? Does it say something different for you?

From my own perceptive, Jesus while he did not undermine the authority of that then present authority that then had precedence in type and figures, as if to then disobey it, he did undermine the longevity of that authority. And he undermined the "egoistic" standing of the the then present authority. He did a darn good job of undermining it. That's just my view however.

My point John, would simply be that I do not understand exactly what you are trying to say. Perhaps others do and perhaps other can help me.

I do believe that we are both looking at this from two very different perspectives. Perhaps you take issue with quotes that I have not posted?
I do not view the above as a doctrine appeal, but rather an angle of approach and communication. A way of seeing and presenting things. I do see the possibility of a continued extrapolation of this approach as we apply kingdom thinking. I have attempted to state things relative to both "partial" or "full" fulfillment of all things written.

John, I always enjoy reading your perspectives. Thank you for all the work that you do.

I hope that my post is not out of line here.

Blessings,
Barry

we are all in this together

Virgil's picture

John, this is very confusing. I can't tell if you are really seeking an answer, trying to insult me or trying to bait me into some semantics game here. I must warn you...I work for the phone company. I've had a lot of experience with semantics, so don't try to lure me into some maze of circular logic. :)

davo's picture

Virgil… I sense possibly that John is serious, I however get the sense that your "semantics" is just good ole' provocative yet harmless advertising :)

davo

Jer's picture

That's not the real John; there's no macron over the 'e.' Everyone knows it' 'Noē,' not 'Noe.'

Virgil's picture

Well, I don't think anyone else got my Seinfeld joke...I'll go back to my corner now :)

Jer's picture

So no webcast this year, eh?

Virgil's picture

I am sorry - I had no one to help me out with the setup (although Jordan Denen did help with the video recording) and the live video feed takes a lot of babysitting and work. The second problem is that the internet connection at this venue is of horrible quality, which makes the whole thing difficult to deal with.

Plus you only live one hour away...why aren't you here? :)

MiddleKnowledge's picture

Yeah, Jer,

You missed out man.

Tim

Jamie's picture

Someone always has a problem with the title, no matter what you call it. You can't please everyone....But I totally get it and I liked the title this year.

Virgil's picture

There is a plethora of meanings to this - and a multiple layers of issues covered in the name of the conference. I am glad you brought up revision control because it's very relevant to what we are doing here. We are not all just getting together once a year just to rub elbows get our backs scratched, but we also challenge each other every year to new objectives and new issues tied to our roles in the Kingdom, our theology, philosophy and whatever other -isms we all face in our own lives.

Thanks :)

JL's picture

I am told "git" is Scot for "begot," but may carry a negative connotation.

Blessings,

JL Vaughn
Beyond Creation Science

Ed's picture

Where else can one go and see people - who do theological and philosophical battle all year, sometimes even getting angry with one another; perhaps even an ad hominem or two - come together in fraternal fellowship? Some folks would say "heaven," and I would have to agree with them; remembering of course that heaven is where God is, and where His people are gathered in His Name and for His sake.

That's what these last few days were to me.

I want to thank all of my dear brothers, who welcomed my old friend, as if he were THEIR old friend. You all made him feel welcome, like he had come home after a long trip. The joy in his spirit could only be expressed with smiles and laughter (that silly laugh that is so uniquely him), and with repeating several times after getting in our rental car to leave, "what a great bunch of guys...they're an awesome bunch of guys."

I couldn't agree more. And so, to Jack, Tim, JL, Jeff, Sam, Tony, Ted, Jim, Fred, Rich, Mickey, Gary, Mark, Bill, and especially Virgil; I thank you.

And to MY new friends; Matt, Mike, Herman, Ben, Don - I welcome you to heaven.

Please brothers, find whatever resources you can and let's make sure this event continues next year, and the year after, and the year after ad infinitum, but surely, never ad nauseum.

I love you all, with the very core of my being - because Christ is the core of my being.

I'm already starting to miss all of you.

ed

Papa is especially fond of us

Ed's picture

Yikes, I forgot Dru (love ya man). Sorry.

And if I forgot anyone else, sorry. I only got a few hours sleep again last night.

peace

ed

Papa is especially fond of us

Sam's picture

I posted this over at the "other" site:

I just got back from the Truth Voice Conference Sunday, and let me say, man, I am tired!

The good times, food, fellowship and suds flowed - there were many great minds there, and great friends, and I enjoyed meeting some new ones as well (I want to leave names out unless I forget to mention a name...but, I am getting better at this remembering names and faces thing....this time I remembered Rich!)

Virgil, as we would expect, threw some curveballs in there as well. Some of the speakers were clearly more or less in "left field" so to speak and generated a buzz - but we all agreed that the views of each of the speakers did not represent the whole. If it did, them Jeff Vaughn and Tim Martin would have to say my lectures represented the whole...which I can say, the most certainly don't! Ha!

I talked about Clark and postmodernism and whether or not you can certainly "know" that a glass is in front you on the table. I argued that from one hand, Clark would see a shining light in the skepticism postmodernists have to bring, but on the other deny their insistence that no absolute truth exists....for Clark, only revelation knowledge is absolute.

Jack Scott's lecture....well, he's Jack Scott and you can listen to him for hours. You have to see or get this presentation he has on the resurrection in I Corinthians 15.....you simply DO NOT KNOW what you are missing!!!! It's the best.

Dave Curtis continues to show his gift of taking a complex theme and making it simple. Virgil's lecture was a round table discussion, more or less, and his whole approach to preterism is non-threatening - and perhaps that's the point. I am not interested in seeing that you become a preterist - and I am interested in you seeing your own bias (right or wrong) when you read a text and become more open to other ways of reading. Whether you accept these other ways is not the point, so long that you are aware of how a Dispensationalist, or a Postmillennialist would "read" a text.

Does anyone remember going to One Eyed Jacks?

Hey Herman!

Love you guys......

Does Ed really like that Indian food???? No meat for Dru?

Virgil, thanks, and congrats on your coming new arrival (a girl or a boy). Blessings to your family. Great seeing all of you....hope to see some of you again at Don's conference.....Blessings!!!!!

Sam

Virgil's picture

Thanks Sam - love ya.

Che Lives!

Ed's picture

Yes Sam, I like that Indian food. I like Chinese food, Mexican food, American food, German food, hell - I like food; which is why I weigh 275 lbs.

But not for long. When you see me next year, I'll be svelte. No, I didn't say I'd be eating smelt, I said that I would be svelte. No, I won't need to take a shower, I'm thinning down. No, I didn't say I was sinning, I said I'm losing weight.

Wait? What do you mean, wait?

I'm confused.

Although I disagree with you Sam, I love ya. Keep studying...maybe you'll agree with me someday. :)

ed

Papa is especially fond of us

mazuur's picture

JERRY GARSCIA!!!!!!!

-Rich

-Rich

Sam's picture

ROFL....I have a picture on my phone with him!! Jerry Garcia!!!!!

mazuur's picture

A picture? Man, I didn't get one. You have to give it to Virgil to put up on Flikr. He's collecting pictures from the conference. Or, after second thought, maybe you better not. lol What a night though!

I think around 12:30 all had fled but you and me. We were 1/2 hour from closing that place down. And things were going good until "somebody" called that one dude "Ahab", as in, "What's up Ahab?!" Things quickly fell apart from there. But, at least I can still picture the dreadlocks. How about you? heh heh heh

Over all, my assessment is you are one crazy dude!

-Rich

-Rich

Virgil's picture

I can't believe you guys went to One Eyed Jacks!! AND you are posting about it online!!!

Ed's picture

Virgil,
They never said that they LIKED it! :)

ed

Papa is especially fond of us

mazuur's picture

Virgil,

You know the place(well)?? C'mon 'fess up. :)

It wasn't our fault! We didn't go looking for it. We were only after something to eat, and someone told Sam about a pizza place over in the strip-mall call "Jacks". As you can imagine, to our surprise, when we got to "Jacks" it wasn't that they didn't have pizza, it's just that they had much more. lol

Personally, I think someone set us up. lol Oh, well, live and learn. At least we got to hang out with Jerry Garcia! I didn't know he was from Ohio. LOL

In all seriousness, it was a good time and everyone was a good boy. Well, maybe not Sam. lol, just kidding. He was a good boy too.

-Rich

-Rich

Virgil's picture

It's a college students hangout...kids from Wright State go there all the time. If I knew you guys were heading that way, I would have put my Che outfit on and came over.

mazuur's picture

Your Che outfit...LOL That would have been a hoot.

-Rich

-Rich

Sam's picture

I think i was a good boy! There was this guy there that looked like Jerry Garcia! All in all, though, Rich, we have made some memories, eh?

Jamie's picture

Thanks for coming everyone-and supporting Virgil in trying to keep these things going.
Each and every one of you means so much to him:)
We love you all and it was awesome to see you!

Virgil's picture

I also wanted to say THANKS again to everyone. I am sure I left people out in what I wrote above, and I apologize if I left your name out...but be certain, I appreciate each and every single person who showed up. All of you guys are heroes, you are making history and you are part of something great which is about to shake the very foundations of Christianity. Thanks, and I hope to see you all again next year.

linda's picture

Thanks, Virgil, for saying that my talk was interesting. Yes, I noticed no one sleeping during it! lol On the way down the hall before it started, someone humorously pointed at the schedule, “Okay, Linda, I have the choice here between learning about salvation from a Calvinist (Dave Curtis),” he moaned, “or about sin from a woman! Baaa!” :-)

My talk was on “Rethinking Sin,” that if the Law passed in A.D. 70 and if sin is the transgression of the Law (1 John 3:4) then perhaps God now considers neither existent.

My favorite session was Dave Curtis’ “Understanding the Transformation of the Ages.” I consider it the best audio presentation I’ve heard explaining basic preterism. Every non-preterist should hear it.

Dave Curtis, I forgive you for calling me a universalist (Mat. 7:13). lol

Virgil, I think that Truthvoice '09 was even better than last year’s. We from the Louisville area send many warm thanks to you and Jamie. We love your growing little family.

Linda Tate

Virgil's picture

Linda, thanks for all the kind words. I love your personality and kindness. I hope you guys come back next year, and I agree with you about David Curtis' session...I am working on the video for it right now. It's a must see.

Sam's picture

Linda,

I think it would be a good idea if we debated the ideas you proposed (thanks for the you know what, by the way). I must say that I strongly disagree with you. Evil has not passed in A.D. 70. Evil has to do with knowledge (knowing good from evil). Maybe we could set something up. My e-mail is samuelmfrost@yahoo.com

Jer's picture

If this should happen, just make sure it's posted on a site the rest of us can read...ahem. ;) ;)

Sam's picture

lol....you are welcome to join anytime...

linda's picture

Sam, ever since reading your book Misplaced Hope, I've had a high respect for you. Excellent resource! Your website has been very helpful too. Thank you for all you’ve done for preterism.

From listening to your podcasts, I understand that one of your motivations, Sam, is to keep full preterism respectable. You may think that my theological opinions could cause lax behavior. I appreciate that, but my experience doesn’t show it.

I'd be honored to discuss the present existence of sin with you.

For those who wonder about what I said during my session, here's its 42 minute recording: http://sermon.net/linda

Virgil took this picture of me: http://www.flickr.com/photos/vaduva/3534493684/in/set-72157618429501286/

Starlight's picture

Linda,

I was not at the conference but your subject is intriguing.

You said … “ My talk was on “Rethinking Sin,” that if the Law passed in A.D. 70 and if sin is the transgression of the Law (1 John 3:4) then perhaps God now considers neither existent.

This idea seems to be verified in the prophecy of Dan 9 concerning the 70 weeks.

Dan 9:24 YLT `Seventy weeks are determined for thy people, and for thy holy city, to shut up the transgression, and TO SEAL UP SINS, and to cover iniquity, and to bring in righteousness age-during, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the holy of holies.

Dan 9:24 ASV … to MAKE AN END OF SINS,

Of course as you said the Law Passed, so Sin under the Commandment/Law was sealed up and discarded according to Dan 9:24. So the question begs; is there any such thing as sin post AD70. Of course there is not anymore a Covenantal Sin of the Law/commandment but is there “SIN” of a different definition regardless of Law which relegates one outside of God’s Covenant presence? Eph 2:12 says that Gentiles were outside this realm of covenant though and they were not partakers of Israel’s covenant promises. That was until that time as brought about through Christ and then they and the Jews were combined into the one Man out of the two. But the catch is that it was believing Gentiles and Jews and not the unbelieving ones who would be God’s Covenantal people.

Eph 2:12 that ye were at that time separate from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without God in the world.

So at the Judgment day of AD70 the antichrist Jews were expunged out of Covenant status and relegated to the same status as the Gentile world that continued to resist Covenant life with God. There was no place anymore except where Sin did not abound which was in the City of Light illuminated by Christ. But outside were the dogs, now disbelieving Jews and Gentiles.

So did sin expire in AD70? Well if one classifies living outside the Presence of God’s Covenant as sin then that form is still with us. The form of sin that expired was sin of the faithful in covenant with God who attempted to foster their own fleshly works which was a wretched attempt at futility. (Rom 7:24)

I’ll look forward to yours and Sam’s debate on this subject.

Norm

linda's picture

Yes, Norm, during my talk I used Daniel 9:24. I also used Matthew 5:17-18’s “until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” Similar passages are Romans 4:15, 5:13, Hebrews 9:26, 1 John 3:9, 5:18.

Here’s 1 John 3:9:

1 John 3:9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God. (NKJV)

“Born of God” refers to A.D. 70, I believe. After that time they couldn't sin. That's because sin ended, as Daniel 9 predicted it would.

In Titus 2:12 they need only deny ungodliness and worldly desires, living sensibly, righteously and godly in their present age.

So, yes, after A.D. 70, God may consider sin having ended.

Here's the audio of my talk: http://sermon.net/linda

Starlight's picture

Linda,

Thanks for the link and so I listened to it and agree with some of your conclusions as I have noted in my previous post. I do think though that we Preterist lose track of the fact that these were Covenant Sins being addressed in much of the context. I think that is a huge application that underlies much of this discussion and it sometimes gets swept under the rug during these discussions. Romans chapter 6 is a great commentary on the nature of this corporate sin of the old law and our freedom from it. Recognizing that Sin was corporately related to Israel and Corporately removed through Christ Body then we do have a great burden removed for those in Covenant with God.

The charge of Universalism is that most folks want to ascribe this removal of sin to humanity at large and IMO nothing could be further from the truth. Humanity as large is not in Covenant with God and as Eph 2:12 states they are without hope and without God. This is again what happened to Jews who rejected Christ. Those who survived the fiery destruction of AD70 were relegated outside to the arena of darkness and evil encompassing the Gentile world. That is what happened to Cain in Gen 4 and also what happened to his and the devils seed in AD70.

Mat 22:13 Then the king said to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and cast him out into the outer darkness; there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.

Mat 24:51 and shall cut him asunder, and appoint his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.

Now I’m not sure where Sam is going with the idea that evil did not pass away at AD70. I tend to agree with him to an extent especially for those outside of Covenant with God. As for those who are in Covenant life through Christ then there is no sin as per the commandment. This is a pretty difficult concept for most of us to get our heads around so again I would look forward to a public discussion between you and Sam. Hopefully on PP so that all may follow it.

1 John 5 has some interesting concepts within it that can add to our confusion over this matter somewhat especially since John says that there is a sin which leads to Death. Of course that was addressed by John in the previous verses describing those who would have eternal life; only those who believed in Christ. (1 Jn 5:12)

1Jn 5:16-18 If any man see his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask, and God will give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: not concerning this do I say that he should make request. (17) All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death. (18) We know that whosoever is begotten of God sinneth not; but he that was begotten of God keepeth himself, and the evil one toucheth him not.

Thanks for the response and keep up the good work.

Norm

davo's picture

Starlight: The charge of Universalism is that most folks want to ascribe this removal of sin to humanity at large and IMO nothing could be further from the truth.

This is why the charge of Universalism made by some prêterists about the inclusive nature of Israel's "fulfilled redemption" and its consequent reconciliation beyond, that some others of us with consistency recognise, is so errant; as always this charge totally misses to the point we make.

As pantelism understands it – "evil and sin" have been present from the beginning and always will be. The key difference post the Cross-Parousia event is that "sin" is nowhere and no longer held to man's charge or account as the means whereby separation from God occurs or remains, i.e., man is no longer liable for "sin" as Jesus bore full liability on behalf of all – primarily for Israel and thus by extension to those beyond – God always dealt with His world through Israel.

Thus was "sin" in the world at large and yet mankind in general was not bound by it or under any sanctions of it as there was no law. This is why technically speaking according to scripture ALL did sin [Rom 2:12]. Israel however was "called" by God's sovereign choosing [Ex 19:5-6; Deut 7:6; 26:18-19; Isa 45:4] out of the midst of darkened [ignorant] humanity [God as Creator owns ALL creation – Psa 24:1; 115:16; Deut 26:19] to be His enlightened servant kingdom of priests – lights to the world [Isa 60:1-3; 49:3].

Now because of Israel's privileged calling as the ones who carried "the oracles of God" and "the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises" [Acts 7:38; Heb 5:12; Rom 9:4] etc, they were more the accountable for their actions, as per "to whom much is given, much is required". This is why God said:

Amos 3:2 "You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities."

Thus even though sin was present in creation before "the fall" as in, "For until the law sin was in the world" Rom 5:13a it wielded no condemnation because "sin is not imputed when there is no law" Rom 5:13b. SIN however as a destroyer did gain entrance into "the world" i.e., the covenant world, through Israel's forebear Adam – a type of that which was to come:

Isa 43:27 Your first father [Adam] sinned, and your mediators have transgressed against Me.

Hos 6:7 But they [Israel] like Adam have transgressed the covenant: there have they dealt treacherously against Me.

Adam's [Israel's] contravening of God's covenant law through covenant sin brought the covenant sanction of covenant death – this was the covenant fall that brought covenant condemnation. ALL THIS applied ONLY to the covenant people i.e., those in Adam [Israel].

So… as pantelism understands it – those OUTSIDE or beyond the "covenant creation" suffered NO "covenant death" because they committed NO "covenant sin" because they were NEVER under ANY "covenant law" in the first place [Heb 9:15] – and thus NOT subject to "covenant condemnation". All Adam [Israel] had to be was God's "vice-regent/s" [Adamites] to God's wider world of men, out of whom they had been taken for the world's ultimate benefit. It was this in their disobedience they continually struggled with.

IOW… Adam's [Israel's] mandate was the BLESS THE WORLD wherein the rest of God's good creation dwelt beyond Paradise. Those "outside" were simply lost in the chaos of darkness i.e., "ignorance" – ignorant as to WHO their good and gracious Creator was. Thus with regards to Eph 2:12's "…having no hope and without God…" it is a great error to insist that Gentiles ardently "continued to resist Covenant life with God" – this is massively assumptive and wrong. The facts are… gentiles were totally ignorant of "covenant life with God" – hopelessly so.

This was the very reason God "called" some to be His ambassadors of light; covenant faithfulness ultimately being fulfilled through Christ and His first-fruit saints – the few [those called] ON BEHALF OF the many [Jn 8:12; 9:5; Mt 5:14].

davo

Barry's picture

Great thoughts and points Linda.
Indeed, all things were made new.

Here are some of my own thoughts:

Hence the usage of the term "present evil age" and "in this present age".

During the transition of the age both "repentance FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS" and "baptism FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS" was offered to BOTH Jews and Gentiles.

Christ died for and put away and put an end to all of it.

Evil as a position or status was done with.
Sin as a position or status was done with.

Possession and ownership also ended. This is the age of stewardship.
Those that were rich in that present age were to be generous.

The above relates to the "ego".
What Christ ended was not the possibility of someone doing harm to another either accidentally or on purpose.
What he ended was the position and status of the self defined person which had precedence in the absence of an unfulfilled revelation.

It was the ego-status that was HEADED UP in covenant and then finished with.

Luk 12:46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for [him], and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
Luk 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not [himself], neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many [stripes].
Luk 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few [stripes]. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
Luk 12:49 I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?

The idea that the second appearance did not effect the Gentiles and those that were not under covenant is imo untenable. Acts 17 also comes to mind:

Sins of the Jews:
Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth NOT IN TEMPLES MADE WITH HANDS;

Sins of the Gentiles:
Act 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and MAN'S DEVICE.
Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
Act 17:31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by [that] man whom he hath ordained; [whereof] he hath given assurance unto all [men], in that he hath raised him from the dead.

While covenant headed up sin which was the ego related "independent human potential", it did not defined it in totality.
As we can see the "temple made with hands" and that which was made of "man's device" are interrelated.

God ended sin and evil and ownership from the aspect of then applied status of an independent human potential.
Thus Christ was the last Adam.
Adam was used to bring in this status and head it up covenantally so that the entirety of the issue could be dealt with in Christ.

This is why both Jew and Gentile were called to repentance and Baptism during the transition of the ages. Both repented, respectively from their various applications of an independent human potential in anticipation of the ending of this status.

I have not had the time to listen yet to your point Linda. My wife need the computer now, but I'm very much looking forward to hearing it.

These are of course some of my own thought on the matter of "sin".
Blessings to you and Great Work.

Barry

we are all in this together

Starlight's picture

Linda,

As you can see there is a divergence of opinion upon who encompasses the Covenant post AD70. Barry and I disagree but he is a worthy student of the word and I have gleaned much from interfacing with him over the years. I would venture to say that much of what Barry presents also fits into the Covenant viewpoint which limits its application to those under God’s Covenant blessings. A Kingly Covenant only makes sense in the Ancient world of those in allegiance to the King and those outside this realm were not partakers of the Kings covenant blessings and protection. (Thus the implication of Eph 2:12) That is the essence of Tim and Jeff’s book which you refer to in your talk as you know it is called Covenant Creation which is the overriding paradigm of the Bible. The essence of the Biblical story is one about Covenant life with God.

Heb 12:24 and to Jesus the mediator of a NEW COVENANT,

13:20 Now the God of peace, who brought again from the dead the great shepherd of the sheep with the blood of AN ETERNAL COVENANT, even our Lord Jesus,

Norm

amie's picture

"“Okay, Linda, I have the choice here between learning about salvation from a Calvinist (Dave Curtis),” he moaned, “or about sin from a woman!"

That sounds pretty sexist to me..

When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at, change.

[url=www.bugsinheaven.com]www.bugsinheaven.com[/url]

Ed's picture

As someone who was sitting at the table when it was said, I can vouch for the fact that it was said in jest - no maliciousness intended.

In everything, even the objections, Linda handled herself with dignity and grace.

ed

Papa is especially fond of us

linda's picture

Ed, yes, the comment was made in jest and with much laughter. Truthvoice was a blast! Thanks for the kind words.

Hello, Amie! I miss you. We should talk again sometime. I won't be able to attend Transmillennial this year.

amie's picture

Linda,

I'm not attending T'mill this year either. I'm working more. But I'm around :-).

Amie

When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at, change.

[url=www.bugsinheaven.com]www.bugsinheaven.com[/url]

Virgil's picture

Phillip, I am sitting here reading your message and my eyes teared up thinking about what you experienced. God revealing himself to his people is an awe-inspiring, mind-blowing, brain-melting thing. It's humbling to be a small part of your life-changing experiences.

Your story and experience is much like what Ron Wagner shared with Tim Martin and I, late Saturday nigh after the conference was over. Tim, Ron and I were sitting around a table by the pool, it was around 11:30, and Ron was telling us his story. He was working third shift as a mainframe operator and when he could no longer contain his excitement he started running around the empty office building in the middle of the night with one of David Chilton's book in his hand screaming "I get it, this makes sense!"

Stay close to God brother - hope to see you again soon! :)

MiddleKnowledge's picture

That was a hell of a story. (Great to see you again, Ron!!)

Ron had another good one, too. While other preterists are getting kicked out of congregations, Ron goes and...

Got to love preterists. What a creative bunch of people.

Tim Martin
www.BeyondCreationScience.com

Jer's picture

I love that guy. Had I known Ron was going to be in OH, I would have made more of an effort to get there :)

MiddleKnowledge's picture

Phil,

Enjoyed lunch at Arby's.

I hope the Covenant Creation Conference was worth your time and expense.

Talk more soon,

Tim Martin
www.BeyondCreationScience.com

Mick's picture

My eyes were moist as I read your story. Thank you for attending. I thank God that He was able to use me in any small way for Him to be more real to you.

Mickey E. Denen

Recent comments

Poll

Should we allow Anonymous users to comment on Planet Preterist articles?
Yes absolutely
23%
No only registered users should comment
77%
What are you talking about?
0%
Total votes: 43