 |
|
|
You know, a prophetess sent me a word through my wife right here, and she said 'Tell your husband that Jesus is going to physically appear in his meetings.' I'm expecting to see - I'm telling you, I feel it's going to happen.
-- Benny Hinn, TBN Praise-a-thon, April 2, 2000
|
|
| |
Preterism: The Heart of The Matter: Defining The Death
Posted on Wednesday, July 18 @ 18:36:53 PDT by Samuel Frost |
|
by Samuel Frost
This is not an official Response to the supposed "debate" between Simmons and me. I stopped that. But, I will not stop writing about what has come about recently. I want to make some points that should clarify the issues involved even further. 1. Simmons first claimed that it was the corporate body view that "necessarily leads" to Universalism. He wrote, "This debate is to decide whether Max King's "covenant eschatology," including his "corporate body view" of the resurrection, necessarily lead to Universalism. By "necessary" we mean only that Universalism is a logical consequence of King's views." Now, he wrote to Larry Siegle, "The corporate aspect of King's system is not the central issue. It is his spiritualization of the resurrection and his premise that the law had to be removed for man to be redeemed that is the source of so much error." This was written after the first statement was.
I originally set out to show that the corporate view, in and of itself, does not lead to Universalism. Simmons has now offended all Reformed Preterists in that he denies that Adam ever was a Federal Head of the human race, and that there was no corporate dimension in Paul's argument in Romans 5. He has brought into the picture the "age of accountability", "freewill" and other aspects that would be entirely at odds with Reformed theology. In Simmons' view, Jesus didn't die for anyone. He merely makes it possible for anyone to be saved if and only if they exercise their "freewill." Clearly, this issue is not about Max King and Kurt Simmons. The reason why so many Reformed Preterists have borrowed from King is that a "corporate" theology was already at work within Reformed theology.
Click here to read the entire column
------
Samuel Frost is a columnist for PlanetPreterist.com. Samuel is a MA Pastor of Christ Covenant Church in Tampa Florida. He is the author of Misplaced Hope and Exegetical Essays on the Resurrection of the Dead, both available in the PlanetPreterist bookstore.
View Samuel Frost 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.
|
| |
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: The Heart of The Matter: Defining The Death (Score: 1)
 by Believability on Wednesday, July 18 @ 21:02:30 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | The essence of "Covenant Eschatology" is the removal of the effects of sin and death through the applied meaning of Christ's death carried through the Parousia in A.D. 70. The "collective" or "corporate" view is the only logical approach that takes up the theme of redemptive history and carries it to its victorious conclusion in Christ Jesus.
Although I may not be of the "reformed" faith (perhaps there remains a "wee bit" of having once been a Baptist), even I understand the concept of the Federal headship of "Adam" in contradistinction to that of "Christ." The analogy of the apostle Paul in that regard shows conclusively that what Adam forfeited in the garden through the entrance of sin into the world is restored in Christ who overcomes "the sin" and "the death." Did not John the Baptizer say that Jesus came as the "Lamb of God who takes away THE SIN of the world"?
It was the enslavement of all of humanity, bound up in the Adamic "body of death" that cried out for deliverance that could only come through the Cross and the Parousia of Christ. The entrance of the Mosaic Law was the chosen vessel through which humanity "in Adam" was carried to the foot of the Cross where the benefits of the shed blood of our Savior were applied. When the gates of Hades were broken down and the day of Judgment arrived the dead ones were released and judged according to their deeds.
There is such harmony is the expression of God's redemptive plan and the carrying out of His eternal purpose. I am certain that you have a different view related to 'election' than do I, however, the reality of what God accomplished is the same. Some received eternal life and others did not. The classic illustration of D.L. Moody is that the door of salvation said on the outside "whosoever will" while on the inside, "chosen from the foundation of the world."
There is much about the eternal wisdom of God that we as humans do not comprehend and yet both of us appreciate the loving response of our Father to needs of fallen humanity.
Simmons simply misses the point because he has become obsessed with the notion that Max King and his theology has become the "mark of the beast" and is leading people off into universalism--a proposition that WAS never, and WILL never be proved as the logical source from which Preterist Universalism arises.
I respect those with whom I strongly disagree with regard to their universalist stance. However, I also strongly disagree with the conclusions Kurt reaches regarding the nature of "the Law" by seeking to dichotomize it into two constituent elements when the Scriptures make no such distinction. Anyone who seeks to "keep the commandments" as a means through which to attain salvation (moral, ceremonial or otherwise) are missing the true meaning of grace which comes as a gift from God through the acceptance of it by faith.
Obedience to God arises OUT of faith and not OUT OF WORKS (ex argon) as the demonstration of that faith. Works of law (in any form) do not bring about justification. Children obey their parent not from a dread of punishment or fear of rejection, but out of hearts that understand the depth and meaning of love and relationship.
Covenant Eschatology is about RELATIONSHIP established through the administration of Covenant on the behalf of those who are IN the covenant.
Larry Siegle
Walnut Creek, CA |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Sam on Thursday, July 19 @ 00:44:07 PDT
Re: The Heart of The Matter: Defining The Death (Score: 1)
 by davo on Thursday, July 19 @ 05:10:42 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) |
It should be quite apparent now that Simmons' alternative leads to Universalism if in fact "the death" is defined as merely "hades." Ah Sam, now you're messin' with my universalist brother's logic – especially when I read this: Then the Death AND the Hades were cast into the lake of fire… – Do you suppose the apostle John had a stuttering problem or purhaps was actually having a double vision? Like here we have "the death" which Kurt says is really "Hades", along with Hades itself – but really being "the death" both together, yet also separate, though all together distinct, being thrown into the lake of fire.
I think being thrown into confusion might be a better translation on Kurt's score???
davo
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by tom-g on Thursday, July 19 @ 08:05:59 PDT
- by Ed on Thursday, July 19 @ 11:59:38 PDT
- by Malachi on Thursday, July 19 @ 13:23:52 PDT
- by Sam on Thursday, July 19 @ 17:52:13 PDT
- by Ed on Thursday, July 19 @ 18:18:08 PDT
- by Malachi on Friday, July 20 @ 09:06:09 PDT
- by mazuur on Friday, July 20 @ 09:55:42 PDT
- by Malachi on Friday, July 20 @ 11:23:23 PDT
- by mazuur on Friday, July 20 @ 13:18:19 PDT
- by Ed on Friday, July 20 @ 23:14:56 PDT
Re: The Heart of The Matter: Defining The Death (Score: 1)
 by tom-g on Thursday, July 19 @ 15:02:13 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Dear Sam,
I agree with you that Kurt's syllogism was not valid, however I would very much like to see how King's theology of his CBV leading to universalism is refuted. Therefore I would like to propose the following syllogism that I perceive Kurt's argument to be.
In its perfect first form of
MP
SM
SP
MAJOR PREMISE:
(M)The time when the loosing of all men from the power of the reign of "The Sin" and "The Death" under the Mosaic Law occurred was (P)at the time that the Eschaton occurred.
Minor Premise:
(S)The time when the universal reconciliation of all men to God occurred was (M)at the time when the loosing of all men from the power of the reign of "The Sin" and "The Death" under the Mosaic Law occurred.
CONCLUSION:
Therefore (S)The time when the universal reconciliation of all men to God occurred was (P)at the time that the Eschaton occurred.
I realize that you do not entirely endorse King's theology but, I would hope you would address and refute this reasoning from the publicly published theology of King.
Thank you,
Tom
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Sam on Friday, July 20 @ 12:09:50 PDT
- by tom-g on Friday, July 20 @ 16:14:02 PDT
- by Sam on Friday, July 20 @ 16:20:59 PDT
- by tom-g on Friday, July 20 @ 18:53:54 PDT
- by tom-g on Friday, July 20 @ 19:16:48 PDT
- by Sam on Saturday, July 21 @ 00:23:48 PDT
- by tom-g on Wednesday, July 25 @ 11:02:08 PDT
Re: The Heart of The Matter: Defining The Death (Score: 1)
by Sam on Friday, July 20 @ 02:48:27 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Kurt, the Nice Guy, posts this on his site when you read our debate:
Congratulations, Kurt:
You ripped the head off the Sammy doll and handed it to him. He knew it, too. I enjoyed his childish scream of anguish.
Sam never did debate. He couldn't, as he didn't have a leg to stand on as you so effectively pointed out. He ranted; he raved; he threatened, but he never debated. He tried to razzle and dazzle (we've all seen that before) and fill the air with dust, but you calmly nailed him to the wall.
The hangers on at P.P. never knew the difference between a sound Biblical presentation and a "defense" based entirely on the traditions of men. The P.P. gang doesn't realize how completely Sam was beaten. But, and this is the important thing, Sam knows it! We know it! And, of course, you know it.
Thank you for dragging that flawed eschatology out into the light.
One wonders how the majority of P.P. commentators can continue to pretend to be Christian and believe the things they believe.
Thanks again, Kurt. As I have mentioned to others, you may well be the sharpest, clearest voice publishing today. God speed!
In Christ,
Arthur Melanson
And here Kurt is wanting to be the Nice Guy.....B.S.
Sam |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by flannery0 on Friday, July 20 @ 05:26:27 PDT
- by Jer on Friday, July 20 @ 06:32:47 PDT
- by Sam on Friday, July 20 @ 09:14:14 PDT
- by Ed on Saturday, July 21 @ 07:26:24 PDT
- by flannery0 on Saturday, July 21 @ 07:59:13 PDT
- by mazuur on Friday, July 20 @ 11:08:11 PDT
Re: The Heart of The Matter: Defining The Death (Score: 1)
by OSTRALOA on Friday, July 20 @ 07:27:07 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Hello All,
I will put my maybe worthless two cents in again from down here in Brazil.
Yes, there have been harsh words here as Tami said many unwarrented for each other and self examination doesn't hurt as she suggested especially when you see an airline crash first hand as I did the last few days with my own eyes and nose with the horrible smell from the crash scene and somber pilots and stewardesses as you walk up the ramp the day after for flights out of the same airport.
Back at the the subject at hand, we are all under the Lord's mercy daily. Perhaps Ed or Jeremy should just get this over with and finally challenge to debate either Sam or Kurt. Ed, Jeremy where's your own challenge to these two biblical preterists? That's what's it's coming down to after all. Does the murderer or worse now go to heaven or get annilhilated at "physical death" just because it's post A.D. 70? Is that God's mercy? No, this whole thing is about right and wrong, scriptural truth vs. nonscriptural errors and opinions.
My end point from down here. Be merciful as God is. Yet our God is a God of Mercy and wrath don't forget and that's scriptural! In the meanwhile, what I saw this week leads one towards introspection of what a great God we have and that our Lord Jesus can save to the utmost. Blessings.
For Christ & Kingdom,
Paul Anderson
Planalmira, Brazil |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
Re: The Heart of The Matter: Defining The Death (Score: 1)
by Believability on Friday, July 20 @ 08:51:29 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | One correction I would like to make has to do with the designation of the CBV as "King's" view. I realize that is there is the tendency to associate a particular viewpoint with a particular person (e.g. Calvisism).
Is there any question in the minds of anyone that the Bible, from a certain standpoint, presents a "collective" or "corporate" concept? (The valley of dry bones etc, "all Israel" etc)
Perhaps our need is for finding the proper balance of how the "collective" view is applied. Do any of us believe that "the resurrection" was anything less than a mass releasing of billions from Hades for the purpose of judgment and rewards?
A whole is equal to the sum of its parts is certainly logical. An apple pie, when sliced into six parts remains constituent elements of the "one pie" when all is said and done.
"the sin" as expressed by John the Baptizer (John 1:29) is the collective body of sin and does not refer to any individual sin. Jesus did not come to take away "the SINS" but rather "the SIN" of the world. Human nature places greater value (for lack of a better term) on one sin over another sin. Lying is BAD, murder is WORSE (we say). In the sight of a Holy God it all falls into the category of that which separates one from His presence. We think, how bad could eating a piece of fruit actually be? How bad could picking up sticks on the Sabbath day actually be? How bad could lying about how much money a piece of property was sold for actually be?
Sin any "size" and in any "measure" brought with it the one, single penalty: death. You lie, you die. You murder someone, you die. You name the name of the Lord in vain, you die. Do we see the point?
TODAY God's people would do far better if the heart of our focus was not on being "sin-conscious" all the time. The more one places his focus on something, the worse it becomes. When we turn our hearts toward our loving relationship with the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and transform our thinking into "righteous-consciousness" we will have taken the first step in breaking away from "sin and death" from which we WERE delivered.
In the mind and heart of God the sin question was long ago resolved. The problem is not with God, but with us. We cannot let the "sin question" go. Rather than leaving justice up to God, we want our pound of legalistic flesh. I trust my Father to be fair with every person--before and without my trying to help Him do a better job at being God.
Larry Siegle
Walnut Creek, CA |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
Re: Smiling at yourself after AD 70 (Score: 1)
 by Life14all on Friday, July 20 @ 09:31:59 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Sam,
I want to publicly apologize to you if there was any perceived disrespect on your part concerning my cartoon about Mr. Simmon's return to Planet Preterist. It seems that men like Mr. Melanson were also deceived by Simmon's because when he published my blog at PP in his newsletter he intentional left out the most important reason I drew that cartoon.
To your credit you saw that it wasn’t my intent to show that Simmon's was gonna rip your head or anyone else's off in the debate but the intent of that blog was to show that I felt he was returning to the very same place to which he had earlier written off in spite of himself. The blog was my way of expressing that for some of us, faith in Christ is all that matters.
Here’s what Kurt intentionally left out of his newsletter concerning my blog.
"And Finally;
Christ's life, His death and His resurrection joined with our faith
has already decided these thing's so "live long and prosper", Spock AD 1967"
There’s the deception on Simmon's part, people. This should alarm some of you out there. I e-mailed Kurt privately on several occasions to remove it from his newsletter if he wasn’t going to use the whole blog entry. Each time he refused and thus his deception continued. It seems that common courtesy and Biblical grace has also ended after AD70 in some COC circles.
This is alarming to say the least. Doesn’t this make anyone here at PP wonder how much other stuff Simmon's conveniently leaves out of the Scripture text when it doesn’t line up with his interpretation of things? And I am saying this as a man who has much respect for Mr. Simmons no matter what his lawyer instincts may tell him about me.
Virgil can also testify there were some things I didn’t post because I didn’t want my brothers here to be offended because of a silly thought or drawing. I have even made light of myself in my blogs. So when Mr. Melanson writes, “ you may well be the sharpest, clearest voice publishing today”, I believe he has also been deceived. Mr Melanson can go here to see my whole blog and then decide how "clear" that voice truly is.
http://blog.planetpreterist.com/index.php?itemid=1292)
So before any more of you left brain, logical, rational, analytical types judge my right brain thinking, maybe you should use both sides of the brain God has blessed you with and smile at yourselves once in a while:-) I do and at least I can say that if anyone here is using their whole brain, I would have to say it is my brothers from Reign of Christ ministries who at least have a sense of humor and understand that grace isn't just a dinnertime ritual but a concept that the whole brain can take comfort in.
James Robert Kessler
www.InChristVictorious.com |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Sam on Friday, July 20 @ 12:04:36 PDT
Re: The Heart of The Matter: Defining The Death (Score: 1)
by Sam on Friday, July 20 @ 11:58:25 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I love it when Rush Limbaugh says, "folks, I am not making this stuff up! I just read it as it is written." Roderick Edwards, on his website (he got it from Kurt), is calling this "The Great Debate." Of course, when Roderick was trying to get me to "not eat" with Virgil, he was non-critical of my explicit Kingian theology. Now that he has someone like, Roderick "the Fly" Edwards shows up looking for a turd to land on. Well, here's his poem...folks, I ain't making this up:
The Great Debate of 2007
On that fateful day they met toe-to-toe, line-to-line
Simmons & Frost, champions both in their minds
On one side sat, men of the Bible & reason
On one side sat, men of the rival & treason
The Great Debate of 2007
To say who would go to hell & who would go to heaven
Some say some & some say all
Depending on the sin the death, and the law
Does it commute or impute Adam’s Fall?
The Great Debate of 2007
To say who would go to hell & who would go to heaven
Some say some & some say all
Frost fired the first shot, sure & hot
Simmons slung his searing sting
Would-be universalists shout & sing
Their apologist in Sammy they have got
The Great Debate of 2007
To say who would go to hell & who would go to heaven
Some say some & some say all
Depending on the sin the death, and the law
Does it commute or impute Adam’s Fall?
The Great Debate of 2007
To say who would go to hell & who would go to heaven
Some say some & some say all
But the day was not done for none had won
On & on syllogisms put forth
Losing ground the debate did morph
Into a theological hit & run
Fear & folly Frost did retreat
But came again at the sign of defeat
His friends gather & lather on him kind words
So he saves face to add last words
The Great Debate of 2007
To say who would go to hell & who would go to heaven
Some say some & some say all
Depending on the sin the death, and the law
Does it commute or impute Adam’s Fall?
The Great Debate of 2007
To say who would go to hell & who would go to heaven
Some say some & some say all
Frost having failed, one last thing
He ranted & raved to say instead
Simmons you fool, you bonehead!!!
Yet Simmons still stands, waiting for those debating to bring
adidabadadiabdi that's all folks!
Sam |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Jhedges on Friday, July 20 @ 12:23:08 PDT
- by Sam on Friday, July 20 @ 12:28:29 PDT
- by Malachi on Friday, July 20 @ 12:41:48 PDT
- by Sam on Friday, July 20 @ 12:51:58 PDT
- by MichaelB on Friday, July 20 @ 13:06:04 PDT
- by Ed on Friday, July 20 @ 23:19:40 PDT
- by Life14all on Friday, July 20 @ 13:11:36 PDT
- by Virgil on Friday, July 20 @ 13:24:08 PDT
- by flannery0 on Friday, July 20 @ 14:18:19 PDT
- by davo on Friday, July 20 @ 23:10:14 PDT
| 
|
