 |
|
|
God spoke Adam into existence in authority with words (Gen. 1:26, 28). These words struck Adam's body in the face. His body and God were exactly the same size.
-- Holy Bible: Kenneth Copeland Reference Edition, 1991, p. 45
|
|
| |
by John McPherson
This is an article I published here a year or so ago, but it was somehow lost from the archives. I feel that the re-introduction of it now, would be both timely and beneficial in relation to the clarification of certian ecclesiological issues currently being debated among us.
Those (including myself) who subscribe to the Fulfilled Eschatology position, hold a uniquely historical perspective on the Scriptures and the entities revealed therein. This perspective guides the hermeneutical approach of the Full Preterist (FP hereafter) exegete. The goal is to read and understand the text from the viewpoint of one of the original recipients of the written revelation of God – the Holy Scriptures. This is accomplished in large measure by careful, rigorous analysis of the text itself via cross-referencing passages and individual verses with other texts in both Testaments. The result is a thoroughly contextual understanding of any given portion of Scripture, in both the most immediate and broadest senses. Historical relevance is paramount, and personal application is a far lower priority than with most futurists (including Partial Preterists).
In terms of the subject at hand in this article, “the church” (Gk. “ekkleisia”) has no clear textual support in terms of its perpetuation as an entity for time indefinite, beyond the First Century era (pre-70 AD in particular). The passages dealing with “church structure” and authority, as well as the goal and hope of “the church”, in its various metaphorical incarnations as both “the Body” and “the Bride” of Christ are clearly time-limited in nature, and have as their focus the saints of the NT period of history. A very specific number of people/saints were “elected” to make up the membership of that foundational generation of the New Covenant Kingdom of Christ. THEY were the “Body of Christ” and His “Bride”. WE are not. As FPs, we believe that the “Marriage Supper of the Lamb” and His “Bride” occurred @ AD 70. There is, of course, ample evidence of the fulfillment of ALL prophecy in the Scriptures at this time, and it is not the goal of this article to elaborate on the fundamentals of this position. However, it is instructive to note that the metaphor of “the Bride” is directly associated with this historically accomplished event, and thus it is plain that this spousal metaphor has no application to any corporate gathering of the saints today (within the FP paradigm).
Likewise, “the Body of Christ” was composed of various specific saints of that period fulfilling clearly defined roles within their local gatherings and memberships. Those roles were defined by the HOLY SPIRIT, who was uniquely outpoured upon THEM. That outpouring was for the pre-AD 70 period of New Covenant Kingdom history and has no direct relationship to or parallel within our experience as saints of the Kingdom today.
The “burden of proof” in terms of substantiating either the position presented above or the one commonly held among the adherents of “Churchianity” today lies upon the latter group. The traditional, natural understanding of ANY historical literary work involves applying the injunctions pertaining to entities of that period to those directly identified within that text. One cannot read the works of Tertullian, Aristotle, Eusebius, Origen, Socrates, Confucious, and others and assume that they relate directly to entities and circumstances of our time. Even great thinkers and theorists in more recent times spoke and wrote from the perspective of their OWN historical period. The propositions of Marx, Darwin, Hegel and other nineteenth-century theorists were limited to projections and scenarios derived from entities existent and influential in THEIR day. They built on the concepts and paradigms of their contemporaries, as well as those who had gone before. Thus, to truly understand their writing and thinking, a certain amount of careful research must be done to determine WHAT the influential entities and paradigms of that era WERE.
Likewise, a rigorously historical approach to the text of the Scriptures provides us with a more accurate understanding of the ORIGINAL INTENT of the Word of God, in accordance with the nuances and inferences popular and familiar in the day in which it was revealed. The primary concern of the modern exegete must be “What did God intend to communicate to the original recipients of this text?” NOT “What did/does God want to communicate to me?”
In Hebrews 8:6-13, we read the following, “6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. 8 Because finding fault with them, He says: "Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah-- 9 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 11 None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. 12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more." 13 In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. “ (NKJV).
Two things are readily apparent in the immediate context of this passage. First, the New Covenant and the People having their origins in it are under consideration (see vss. 6,7). The “house of Israel and the house of Judah” references the New Covenant People (Spiritual) who had their origins in that Covenant. The original members of the New Covenant Kingdom of Christ were, of course, primarily Israelites/Jews. The New Testament Christians (and those who would be their descendants, spiritually) were the “house of Israel and Judah” who are the focus of this passage. Second, the nature of the Covenant as described in vss.10-12 specifies the CHRISTIAN’S experience with God, directly, via interaction with His Spirit and Word.
Note VERY carefully that v.11 CLEARLY indicates there is no longer any need for teachers/preachers within this New Covenant Kingdom. The “provisional church structure” of the New Testament period was evidently intended to pass away when the Old Covenant Nation was terminated forever (70 AD). The NT Church was uniquely provided to THOSE saints for maintenance of the fledgling faith in its fetal stages, as a “spiritual incubator” of sorts. When the intense persecutions of the Great Tribulation of those days were brought to an end, the need for any kind of formally structured “religious body” meeting together regularly also passed away. As that which was “obsolete” actually “vanished away” (v.13), so did the need for a “church”.
Christ Himself, in comparing the attitudes and inner qualities of those aspiring to leadership in His Kingdom with the despotic, tyrannical tendencies of the Phrarisees had this to say:
“8 But you, do not be called 'Rabbi'; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. 9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. 11 But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” (Matt. 23:8-12, NKJV).
These injunctions mesh perfectly with the stated intent of God with respect to His emerging Spiritual Kingdom, in Hebrews 8. God, ultimately, desired (and still desires) a “leaderless” Kingdom (in terms of human leadership). He wants the Kingdom to be characterized by self-sacrificial service to one another and those around us, on a very basic, interpersonal level. The huge “church” budgets and buildings of today are, quite simply, outside of God’s perfect Plan for His People today, as the spiritual descendants of the original “house of Israel and Judah”.
In 1Cor. 15:24-28, we find that ALL rule, authority and power involved with the Old Covenant "Kingdom" (including CHRIST'S OWN, as YHWH of OC Israel) was made subject to the sole authority of the Godhead, as God alone rules and governs the New Covenant Kingdom of Heaven WITHOUT human agencies co-governing and ruling under His jurisdiction as "undershepherds" or anything else of that nature. All First Century Church authority, rule and power designations passed from this realm with the establishment of the eternal Kingdom of Heaven here. Thus, the Scriptures do not permit us to falsely assign titles such as "pastor", "bishop", "elder", or any other such term to anyone attempting to assume a role of spiritual authority over someone else in our day. Nor is the "ekklesia" or "church" a term having any relevance to fellowship gatherings today.
Let’s re-commit ourselves to determining the primary, originally intended interpretation/application of the Scriptures as understood by their original “target audience”. Only in this kind of approach is God’s glory truly manifested in His historical revelation of Himself via His interactions with His People, in ancient history. And let’s remain true to God’s original intent in providing us with the written revelation of Himself that we have today.
Serving the Truth,
John McPherson
------
John McPherson is a columnist for PlanetPreterist.com. John McPherson lives in British Columbia, on the West Coast of
Vancouver Island with his wife and two boys. John enjoys studying and writing, and is currently working on a B.Th. program.
View John McPherson archives
Note: Opinions presented on PlanetPreterist.com or by PlanetPreterist.com columnists may not necessarily reflect the position of PlanetPreterist.com, or reflect the beliefs, doctrine or theological position of all other preterists. We encourage all readers to first and foremost carefully analyze all articles in the light of God's Word.
|
| |
|
|
Average Score: 3
Votes: 4
 |
|
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: Full Preterism and the Church (Score: 1)
 by doughoist on Sunday, April 10 @ 17:56:59 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I really don't see through the same glasses as you concerning the church. The idea that the church is no longer relevent today is quite disturbing. Christ esablished the church and died for it. The church is the Heavenly Jerusalem, the city from above. The church is the Kingdom and it was never to pass away. Jesus gave us the New Covenant while he still lived, not after his parousia. It took effect at his death.
Men no longer have to teach no one has to teach his neighbor or brother to know his God because, in contrast to the Old Covenant, one is taught first and then is born into the family of God though baptism. Under the Old system, you were born a Jew and then taught about your God. Hebrews is a book that contrasts the Old and the New, the good with the better.
The idea that the church is no longer viable is really quite perplexing. Its importance is unsurpased as it is the Kingdom of God. It is the rock that grew and filled the whole earth. It is the body of Christ where all the fulness of him dwells.
It seems to me that the burden of proof is yours if you should put forth that the church was only a first century entity. You have stated it but you have not proven it.
Understand, using the mariage of God to Israel as an example. Was that the end of the Kindom of Israel or the begining? Did Israel lose her significance because of her marraige? Was the Kingdom before or after the marriage? When God was preparing her to be his bride, was she not still Israel? After her marriage was she not Israel?
The Church was in her infancy growing toward maturity under the school master of the Law. She was made perfect at the parousia and her school master was no longer needed and the Church was perfected. If it is as you say, the church is what was finished and no longer needed.
“to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.” Ephesians 3:21, NKJV. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by mrfullpreterist on Sunday, April 10 @ 18:58:25 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Sunday, April 10 @ 22:10:43 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Sunday, April 10 @ 22:06:16 PDT
- by nate4onenation on Monday, April 11 @ 08:36:02 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, April 11 @ 09:17:29 PDT
- by doughoist on Tuesday, April 12 @ 20:51:43 PDT
Re: Full Preterism and the Church (Score: 1)
by davecollins on Sunday, April 10 @ 18:37:08 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Dear John, I always appreciate your thought provoking articles, and your obvious mandate to others to search the Scriptures for Truth.
I have been serving at a large(800) evangelical church for about 12 years.Since becoming a FP 3 years ago, I have been increasingly studying the points you present.
I think your take on the pre AD 70 church is right on the money, but to deny the furtherance of the church after the Parousia seems unfounded to me.
To say that present day believers do not make up the "Body of Christ" seems illogical and gives the notion that we are disconnected today.
I happen to agree that the "pouring" out of the Spirit to the early church was an amazing act of God to establish and verify the Gospel of Christ.This was a one time event, with lasting implications for all believers
Contrary to your view, I believe the parallel today, is His indwelling Presence as the Power of our New Nature.Our transformation only occurs due to His activity in our surrendered lives.
Since I have become vocal in my FP beliefs,my pastors have not censored or labeled me in any way, but rather have asked me to serve on our ministry leadership team, as an "elder".
I believe, as you do, that there is tremendous abuse of authority and mistaken priorities in some churches(maybe alot), but I think having a structure,and a strategy is beneficial in working out our vision of reaching the unchurched with the gospel of Christ. Of course, the great commission, given to the Lord's disciples prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, was fulfilled in the first century, but continues to be a main example to today's believers.
There is great encouragement in fellowshipping with other believers when you experience and see sacrificial love, forgiveness, and acceptance being portrayed.I was greatly encouraged this morning as I witnessed two ladies, who were at odds over some disagreement, kneel to pray together in restoration and obedience.
Bottom line for me, at this juncture of my life, is to ascertain the patterns we see in the early church and to emulate and strive to help accomplish the expansion of His unending Kingdom.Since our "operating manual" was completed before the return of Christ, to instruct and encourage fledgling believers, during their tribulations, we must primarily determine how they would interpret things, and then discern eternal spiritual principles to apply today. The greatest leaders are the best servants,those who humbly report to duty with a willing and grateful heart.
Today's "churches" with a major emphasis on "decisions" rather than on an authentic relationship, can be a wonderful field for a Christian missionary to operate in.
Honestly John, titles, and even roles are trivial and sometimes distracting to those who only want to serve the Lord, for His Glory.
Your friend, Dave |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, April 11 @ 00:12:37 PDT
- by davecollins on Monday, April 11 @ 07:58:26 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, April 11 @ 09:24:03 PDT
Re: Full Preterism and the Church (Score: 1)
by judge on Sunday, April 10 @ 18:38:14 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Thanks for the article, well worth posting again.
A question for you (not trying to trap you in any way)
How do you see life different post 70 a.d. for a "non christisn" person just trying to live a spiritual life? |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by SuperSoulFighter on Sunday, April 10 @ 22:49:13 PDT
- by judge on Monday, April 11 @ 22:00:39 PDT
Re: Full Preterism and the Church (Score: 1)
by vinster on Monday, April 11 @ 07:27:15 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Hey John, Your article is not being swallowed too easily, but I can understand where you're coming from to a point.
Anyway, I have two questions I would like to ask:
1) Do you feel that Jesus' words, "Unless a man is born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God", still apply post 70ad??
2) You said, "Nor is the "ekklesia" or "church" a term having any relevance to fellowship gatherings today."
In your opinion, what should a fellowship gathering consist of today??
Thanks for your time, Vinster
P.S.--Did you ever find that article on "De-universalizing the Gospel"??
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by vinster on Monday, April 11 @ 07:30:34 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, April 11 @ 09:54:42 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, April 11 @ 09:53:26 PDT
- by MichaelB on Monday, April 11 @ 11:26:39 PDT
- by MichaelB on Monday, April 11 @ 11:33:21 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, April 11 @ 13:51:56 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, April 11 @ 13:49:32 PDT
- by MichaelB on Monday, April 11 @ 16:03:41 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, April 11 @ 18:55:08 PDT
Re: Was God's Newly-Established Government Made Obsolete at 70 AD? (Score: 1)
 by chrisliv on Monday, April 11 @ 15:02:57 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Well,
Everybody here has probably heard my take on this subject. But it may be helpful and relevant to comment again.
I think there is an overarching misconception that both Preterists and Futurists have about the Greek term "ecclesia", which for us English speaking people has been poorly translated as "church".
Ecclesia is a term for "government". The Ecclesia is God's Government on Earth. The Kingdom of Heaven on Earth is a non-hostile government. It seems hard for people to see its reality because it's so much different than the worldly governments, as Christ stated:
"And he said unto them, 'The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so among you...'" Luke 22:25 & 26
Most people who read English Bible translations have been condition into thinking that God's government has only to do with a religious sideline, fellowship, or worship services and sacraments.
If Preterists pose the question: "Was the Church made obsolete in 70 AD?" they may do far better to pose the question more accurately as: "Was God's government on Earth made obsolete in 70 AD?"
Of course, the Futurist would say that it hasn't even happened yet, while they instead obey virtually every hostile Potentate that comes down the pike from the State.
So, as a Preterist and a non-statist, the answer becomes obvious. The idea that God's Government (ecclesia), Kingdom, or some portion of the New Covenant became obsolete at 70 AD is ridiculous. Rather, that's when it fully started.
And for about 250 years, Christ's Body was a separate and underground from the Body of the State, until savvy Caesar Constantine "had a vision" to conquer his battlefield enemies with Christ's banner. Around 312 AD Caesar's Empire was about to fall apart, so he "legalized" Christianity and invited the "Church" to become a State corporation and share in the Imperial power, that is, so long as the "Clergy" ensured that "Christians" fought on the battlefield for the State.
The "Church" has pretty much been a State corporation ever since. And it's my opinion that most churchgoers have been conditioned to accept " State and Church" instead of "God's Government" on Earth. There have been a few valiant exceptions, like the Anabaptists. And even today, there are a few groups that refuse to go overseas to kill poor people for the State. Even the state-incorporated Watchtower organization has a symbolic anti-statist, anti-militaristic position, although those poor souls are made into brainwashed mass-purchasers and peddlers of Watchtower literature.
Peace to you all,
C. Livingstone |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, April 11 @ 17:12:10 PDT
- by chrisliv on Monday, April 11 @ 17:57:09 PDT
Re: Full Preterism and the Church (Score: 1)
by Sam on Monday, April 11 @ 15:55:41 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | John,
Once again, if there are no need for teachers, then why do you keep trying to teach us that?
Sam |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by SuperSoulFighter on Monday, April 11 @ 16:52:17 PDT
- by Sam on Monday, April 11 @ 18:42:48 PDT
- by vinster on Tuesday, April 12 @ 08:13:41 PDT
- by Sam on Tuesday, April 12 @ 09:36:44 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Tuesday, April 12 @ 10:09:27 PDT
- by MichaelB on Tuesday, April 12 @ 11:28:22 PDT
- by nate4onenation on Tuesday, April 12 @ 12:18:33 PDT
- by Sam on Tuesday, April 12 @ 15:03:23 PDT
- by nate4onenation on Tuesday, April 12 @ 16:13:45 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Tuesday, April 12 @ 18:20:42 PDT
- by nate4onenation on Wednesday, April 13 @ 08:48:02 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Tuesday, April 12 @ 17:29:29 PDT
- by davo on Wednesday, April 13 @ 01:07:03 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Wednesday, April 13 @ 02:27:56 PDT
- by davo on Wednesday, April 13 @ 05:31:07 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Tuesday, April 12 @ 20:00:39 PDT
- by nate4onenation on Wednesday, April 13 @ 09:06:26 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Tuesday, April 12 @ 19:47:32 PDT
- by Parker on Wednesday, April 13 @ 08:19:34 PDT
- by vinster on Thursday, April 14 @ 05:39:38 PDT
- by Parker on Thursday, April 14 @ 06:55:28 PDT
The Church, the Kingdom, and the Burden of Proof (Score: 1)
by Parker on Wednesday, April 13 @ 08:11:00 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | The idea that the Church became extinct on the earth at AD 70 is patently false, both biblically and historically. Scripture clearly teaches no such thing, and history shows that the apostolic churches existed right on through AD 70 to AD 71, AD 72, etc. etc..
In addition, it is impossible to separate those first "called out ones" from their promised reward: the Kingdom. It is their Kingdom and not ours according to scripture (Mt 16:18-19; Mt. 25:33-34) -- that is, if we consistenly apply McPherson's hermeneutic. It is a glaring inconsistency that the author teaches an extinction of the Church on earth at AD 70 but not an extinction of their just reward on earth at AD 70. Obviously, the promised reward exists where the elect Church exists--and it resides there with them alone. If the Church exists only in God's transcendent heaven, then the reward (the Kingdom) exists only in heaven as well. Certainly the Kingdom would then have nothing to do with us some 20 centuries later. The author needs to be consistent.
Finally, John McPherson is seriously confused about the way the "burden of proof" works. When the status quo of scripture teaches the existence of the Church on earth, the burden of proof is on the author to produce clear scripture references that say the Church no longer exists on earth (or would no longer exist on earth). Such no such scriptures exist, we know that McPherson's entire thesis is based on his personal conjectures and wishes, not upon scripture.
Perhaps the most grievous errors McPherson makes in the article are demonstrated in his mishandling of scripture. It would appear that McPherson mistakenly regards Hebrews 8:6-13 as a post-AD 70 reality. It most certainly speaks of a pre-AD 70 reality. Note that the New Covenant there was already established and the ministry obtained (Heb 8:6), and the apostles were already ministering within that new covenant framework (2 Cor 3:6). Note that while the covenant was made with the houses of Israel and Judah (Heb 8:8), that covenant is eternal (Heb 13:20) and also includes the gentiles (Eph 3:6; 2:11-16; Gal 3:8-9, 14). Note that the claim that God's laws would be written in their minds and hearts (Heb 13:10) was a pre-AD 70 reality (2 Cor 3:3,6; Romans 2:14-15). Note that God had become their God and they his people (Heb 8:10) prior to AD 70 (2 Cor 6:16; 1 Peter 2:10).
Furthermore, the injunction about not needing teachers to teach (Heb 8:11) relates to people who are already taught, not to those that have never heard or who haven't learned well (Heb 5:12). A person who already knows true doctrine needn't be taught again (Heb 5:12-14). We also should carefully notice that this reality about "knowing God from the heart" spoken about in Hebrews 8:11 preexisted way back at the Babylonian exile when the Lord God said unto the exiles through Jeremiah: Thus says the LORD God of Israel, `Like these good figs, so I will regard as good the captives of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans. For I will set My eyes on them for good, and I will bring them again to this land; and ... I will give them a heart to know Me, for I am the LORD; and they will be My people, and I will be their God, for they will return to Me with their whole heart.' (Jer 24:5-7)
So we see that McPherson has plainly erred in viewing Heb 8:6-13 as a POST-AD 70 reality. The passage clearly spoke of PRE-AD 70 realites and blessings, and parts of the experience were even common to the exiles of Babylon nearly 600 years before AD 70. Therefore we understand that the New Covenant Church is not somehow made obsolete by Hebrews 8:6-13, and for sure the injunction about not needing a teacher depends on one's already having been taught well (Hebrews 5:12).
As we might expect by now, the author has blundered elswhere, particularly in his interpretation of Matt. 23:8-12 (injunction agai
Read the rest of this comment... |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by doughoist on Wednesday, April 13 @ 16:02:43 PDT
- by Parker on Wednesday, April 13 @ 17:01:06 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Friday, April 15 @ 07:43:48 PDT
- by doughoist on Friday, April 15 @ 13:40:52 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Sunday, April 17 @ 14:20:07 PDT
- by doughoist on Monday, April 18 @ 14:51:01 PDT
Re: Full Preterism and the Church (Score: 1)
by SuperSoulFighter on Friday, April 15 @ 07:47:08 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I will be away for a couple of days, but will be back Sunday evening (most likely) and will do my best to get that promised article published here at that time. I know several people are waiting for my latest material concerning the Biblical nature of our current spiritual experience (which is almost finished), so I will present it at that time, on my return.
Thanks for your patience, folks! Many of you (with one notable exception) had some very good, insightful comments to make here, and those are appreciated. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
| 
|
