If you have been around for a while, the chart above or something like it wouldn’t be unfamiliar to you. LOL. There are many eschatological positions and I will not address the one that fancies me at this time. However, most of us agree that Christ will return a second time and eventually (what’s a thousand years between brothers) this work will usher in what we define as the Kingdom of God (fully) and the New Heavens and New Earth. Again there is much debate, but what I want to talk about in this Chain Blog is the peace that will be restored in Christ’s second advent. The scripture I chose is Romans 8:19-22.
19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.
If you watch the news long enough you will either be overwhelmed with grief or become apathetic. Most of us have become apathetic, it is the only way to cope with the turmoil we see daily. Many of us have loved ones in the War in Iraq, we see poverty, famine takes the lives of millions if not billions, we see civil wars, genocide, we see those who are physically deformed, we see divorce, child abuse, spousal abuse, racism, slavery, tyrannical governments, we see babies aborted, we see children raped, we see corporate scandals, we see babies die of cancer, we see diseases take the lives of those who were healthy and vibrant a year before, we see funeral homes, cemeteries, we see animals devour one another, we see humans destroying the environment, taking advantage of one another, we see looting, robbing, murder, destruction, we even see things like tsunamis, tornadoes, earthquakes, droughts, floods, hurricanes (Katrina?), lighting, cyclones and we say “when will it end”.
When will it end? When Christ returns. Because of sin there is no peace! Adam’s rebellion brought all you see into this world and until the second Adam finishes His work the world will continue to suffer. How grateful we are for the relief of many of the things I listed above. We have doctors, medicine, warning systems, police, prisons, laws, we have relief agencies, and governments who as best they can stop the death of innocent human beings. Most of all we get a glimpse of this peace in the Gospel. It is our hope (Romans 8:24-25) that the pain and chaos that we experience today will one day cease and we have a God who cannot lie promise that it will end!
However the temporary peace falls far short of what we will receive in glory. New bodies that function at the capacity that Adam and Eve functioned at, bodies that will live forever, no more cancer, AIDS, heart disease, blindness, arthritis, broken bones, cavities, gland diseases, obesity, psychological disorders or death. But not only that this peace will also usher in peace with the environment and world we will occupy. No more animals destroying one another, no more earthquakes, tsunamis killing 100’s of thousands, no more hurricanes causing government scandals, no more tornadoes killing 3 year old kids and 90 year old grandmothers. Nope, we will live in perfect harmony just as Adam and Eve did. We only must, with great anticipation, wait for the return of our King! He will set it all straight.
In closing when I think of peace, I don’t think of Obama or McCain. I don’t think of the U.N or Bono’s AIDS campaign. I don’t think of “Feed the Poor” or the Red Cross. I think of Jesus. Because though the things above may bring temporary healing and peace, only the creator of the world can restore to level it was before the fall! Thanks for allowing me to participate in this Chain Blog gentleman. I hope to spark others to carry it on.
—————————————————-
Chain blog rules:
1) If you would like to write the next blog post (link) in this chain, leave a comment stating that you would like to do so. If someone else has already requested to write the next link, then please wait for that blog post and leave a comment there requesting to write the following link.
2) Feel free to leave comments here and discuss items in this blog post without taking part in the actual “chain”. Your comments and discussion are very important in this chain blog.
3) When you write a link in this chain, please reply in the comments of all previous links to let everyone know that your link is ready. Also, please try to keep an updated list of links in the chain at the bottom of your post, and please include these rules at the bottom of your post.
—————————————————-
“Peace” Chain
Link 1: “Peace – A Chain Blog” by Alan Knox
Link 2: “Peace – A Chain Blog” by Joe (J.R.) Miller
Link 3: “For Peace Sake” by Chris Dryden
Link 4: “A Restoration of Peace…” by Lionel Woods
Amen brother. Something we too often forget–true peace only comes when our Messiah returns!
Lionel,
Great post. I agree with you and Joe that we will only know complete peace when Christ returns. I hope that someone will pick up from your post and discuss how we as Jesus’ followers can demonstrate peace now in spite of our sinfulness… and what do we do when we are not living a life of peace?
-Alan
I’m glad you said “most” instead of us all, oh no why this! This is for the professor lol.
Which Jesus are we waiting for? Which will establish peace, the Creator… or this Jesus Fellow (not the same)? Why wait for peace when it is peace waiting for you?
Be peaceful.
Show me the peace you say is waiting for us Chuck. When have you seen peace on this earth brother? Who do you think will usher it in? Humanity? If you think so, I have some land in Texas and underneath it is a diamond mine, since we are friends I will sale it to you a 500K an acre. I own 4 acres. We both become millionaires instantantly. What do you say?
What if this Jesus your waiting for has already come ?
What if the peace your specking of is not biblical?
What if what you were taught was wrong?
What if the kingdom of God was not of this world?
Michael,
If, if was 10 dollars I would be Bill Gates.
Lionel-
I agree that there will be no true peace in the world from a natural viewpoint until the return of Christ.
But the Kingdom that believers belong to is not of this world and we indeed can have a peace that surpasses understanding while an unbeliever can only have a peace that is understandable. An unbeliever can have peace when everything is going “right” in his/her life, job is fine, plenty of money in the bank, they are enjoying good health etc. This is an understandable peace. God’w Word says that we can right now as a believer have a peace that transcends understanding-it is possible to be at peace despite the difficult things that come into our lives. It is also a compelling testimony to a fallen world and quite often a springboard for conversation and an opening to present the gospel. My wife and I have had a number of opportunities to present the gospel to people who have asked how we could be at peace when we were facing difficult and trying situations. I truly believe this is what God’s Word told us to be prepared for as we are to be ready to share with those who ask of the hope that resides within us. When we respond to circumstances that come into our lives like unbelievers do, it is unlikely that anyone will ask us of the hope that resides within us as it is not readily apparent.
Almost all of Paul’s writings started with his dual greeting of grace and peace to you in Christ Jesus and the attribute of peace and the peace we can have through Christ is mentioned over 75 times in the Law of Christ in relation to a believer true reality. Right here and right now.
Peace be with you, Brother.
I do not know who God’w is that should have read God’s Word. Grin.
lionel, i don’t understand your reply to micheal. if you had $10 you would be bill gates, huh?
He gave me a bunch of “what ifs” I said if, if was $10 dollars then I would be a billionaire. In other words ifs have very little to no value at all. Jesus has not returned, the fullness of the kingdom has not been employed and Satan, sin and death still reign supreme. Thus the peace that I wrote about is still in the future and yes I am a futurist.
If Christ has returned, I am very dissatisfied with my resurrected body! What a rip off!
Oh yeah, we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper as well if Christ has already returned.
Hey Lionel:
That title had me worried for a moment – but you successfully wrote an entry that didn’t require a degree to understand!!
When I read what you wrote about ultimate peace found in Christ and not in stuff that the world puts forward it reminds me of a track by Jon Gibson called ‘The End’ and the lyric
Someday there’s gonna be
A better world for you and me,
But it’s not gonna come from man
Or from His misguided plan,
It’s gonna come with Jesus
In the end
Thanks for this Lionel and I trust that someone does pick up on the chain. I’d be fascinated to see someone talk about whether biblical peace works in the multi-cultural and multi-faith society.
Bless you sir
da man cd
In regards to the comment on the resurrection body, show from the Old Testament where physical bodies where to be resurrected at the end of the age. Paul said he preached the resurrection that was the hope of Israel (Acts 23:6)
Who says we are to stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper? Surely it is a celebration of the marriage Supper of the Lamb.
If there is to be no pain or suffering when Christ returns, please explain these text that refer to the New Heavens and Earth:
Isaiah 65:17-25 and Revelation 21:26-27. These have to be taken into consideration in understanding Romans 8:19-22.
These are thoughts because Jesus Christ has brought peace. If not then we are still waiting for salvation (Heb 9:28) Sorry, but a futurist interpretation does extreme violence to many of the text of Scripture.
NHE
Just got in from work what is going on here lol!
1, Romans, “18″ to 22 this “present time” the sufferings of that time are not worthy to be compared with the ‘GLORY’ which “shall” be revealed in “us” who! in that present time.
2, The whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until when. ”Now” then not now doesn’t mean when ever.
3, Romans, 8:23 how long can “they” groaneth within themselves Key waiting for the adoption to wit the “redemption” of our body. aka the resurrection!
4 Compare Romans,8:23 with what Jesus said in Luke,21:27and 28 And when these things begin to come to
pass, then look up and lift up”your” heads for “your” redemption “draweth nigh”Greek 1148. This could never be “far” my friends.
5 They should have look down, and drop there heads because there redemption draweth “far” as we know it today!
6 This would have been puzzling to Luke to say the least.
7 Why did they THERE redemption have to put on hold, because of “who” and “when” until what time may I ask
this question.
msamu,
What if Jesus has not yet come ?
What if the peace we are specking of is biblical?
What if what we were taught is right?
What if the kingdom of God is of this world AND of the world to come?
Peace is right in front of us. Each time we are faced with conflict or adversity, we are face with the opportunity to be peaceful. Yet, because we inflict so many labels that distinguish and separate ourselves from others, we feel that peace is out of our grasp. This is why nothing good will ever come from theistic base ritual (Religion). Do you think you have to wait for “Jesus” to return before trying experience peace? Try this, Stop trying to distinguish what is right and what is wrong. I can’t believe you have lists of both good and bad churches. What is it that stops us from living and allowing others to live? Try accepting “difference” peacefully, lovingly and quietly.
A Hutch man you have to die first before you get that body.
Don’t worry you won’t be displeased with it that’s for sure.
I am confident that I will not be displeased with my resurrected body that I will receive when Christ returns.
When we see Him, we will be like Him!
Our full preterist friend indicates that Jesus has already returned.
I said, If Jesus has already returned, I am disappointed with my resurrection body.
We are told to celebrate/remember Christ’s death until He returns-celebrate the Lord’s Supper.
If Christ has already returned, then we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper.
Chuck let me ask you something,
Was it wrong for the people to drive planes into the towers back in 01?
DTG and NHE,
Sorry not convinced. Ask the Christian who is dying from cancer is this the best it get. Ask those in Haiti that just took over 200 lives if the “world is still groaning”. Asked the little girl who was molested by her older brother for 10 years, if Sin has been dealt with. If you believe that what Christ promised us and what Paul longed for in 2 Corinthians 5 (to be rid of this tent) and what he promised the Corinthians in chapter 15 then enjoy.
Hey Lionel the disciples were convinced on Jesus words to “them” about his return.
1, About the people dying lets start out with Genesis,8:21 and 22.
2, 1 Corinthians,15: 55 to 58 verse 56 strength of “sin” is the law. What is sin to you?
3, Was it Solomon who said there is nothing “new” under the sun. Killing and everything else etc,etc.
4, I do believe that Christ fulfill everything he said would in the time he said.
5, So that gives us the benefits of the fulfill tents when we die.
6, Nobody wants to see anybody murder, see no#1
lionelwoods7
You have still not interacted with the text I put forward. Both of those texts are looking after the return of Jesus Christ. So in dealing with your specific examples, you can provide hope to all that this life is not what is to be hoped for but an eternal kingdom, with bodies given to them by God Himself. You are suffering from the same mistake the Jews made during Christ earthly ministry. They wanted a physical kingdom and missed the Messiah’s coming. Isn’t it possible your futurist view suffers from the same malady?
I have read many of your previous post and they are very good. So if the early church fathers got it wrong on their view of the church, is it not possible their eschatology was wrong as well?
NHE,
Those text speak of no pain and no death where the lamb and lion will lay together. What are you saying?
Tp JR Miller
What if Jesus has not yet come ?
:then Jesus was not the Christ, the bible is a lie, and your not saved
What if the peace we are specking of is biblical?
:then Jesus could not be Christ, the bible is a lie, and your not saved
What if what we were taught is right?
:then Jesus was not the Christ, the bible is a lie, and your not saved
What if the kingdom of God is of this world AND of the world to come?
:then Jesus was is the Christ, the bible is a lie, and you will never be saved
NHE,
Hebrews 9 says:
28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
Are you saying that sin has been dealt with? Now some questions for you.
1. Has Satan been thrown into the lake of fire?
2. Do people still die?
3. Do we have the same body that Jesus had before he ascended to the right hand of the father
4. Has the judgment that Christ talks about in Matthew 25 occured?
5. Has the judgment that Christ talked about in Matthew 7 occured?
6. If this is the New Heaven and new earth, tell that to some good brothers and sister who just lost their child to a serial pedophile who was recently apprehended.
7. Tell this to the chuch that is being martyred.
8. Brother where are the promises made throughout the New Testament. Are you saying they are fully realized today?
JR Miller can you answer the below?
Has the “Great Commission” (preaching of the gospel to all the world) been fulfilled?
Yes No
QUESTION 2
Do Christians go immediately to Heaven upon physical death?
Yes No
QUESTION 3
Is Satan currently ruling over the world?
Yes No
QUESTION 4
Is Jesus currently sitting at the right hand of the Father?
Yes No
Michael,
How about Jesus first work on the cross saved me and those between his death and AD 70 were still saved and if they would have died Paul promises them in Thessoloinans that they would rise as the others are changed. So that arguement seems to be a bit void.
Christ returning had nothing to do with the salvation of Paul. Paul was definitely saved and died before the destruction of temple. So did he miss salvation? That is what you would be saying.
Lionel what does romans 16:20 mean to you by shortly!!
Hutch the lord supper do it until he comes.Do you think by you doing this it takes away from what he did in. Fulfilling his word.
Yes, I fully intend to observe the Lord’s Supper until He comes and I am waiting in anticipation for my glorified and resurrected body.
But…
If Jesus has already returned, I am disappointed with my resurrection body.
If Christ has already returned, then we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper.
Blessings.
From your A-Mil, Partial Pretersist, Idealist Brother in Christ.
DTG and Mike,
When did Jesus actually return?
1. Hebrews 9 says:
28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
Are you saying that sin has been dealt with? Now some questions for you.
Yes sin has been dealt with.
1. Has Satan been thrown into the lake of fire? Yes read Revelation 20:7
2. Do people still die? Yes refer once again to Isaiah 66
3. Do we have the same body that Jesus had before he ascended to the right hand of the father Yes. Only Jesus was promised that His body would not see corruption ( Acts 2:27)
4. Has the judgment that Christ talks about in Matthew 25 occured? (Yes)
5. Has the judgment that Christ talked about in Matthew 7 occured? (Yes)
And we see in the New Heavens and Earth nations flowing in to eat of the tree of life for their healing (Rev 22:2)
6. If this is the New Heaven and new earth, tell that to some good brothers and sister who just lost their child to a serial pedophile who was recently apprehended. (Yes and show them the promises of God)
7. Tell this to the church that is being martyred. (Once again we should take them to the promises of God)
8. Brother where are the promises made throughout the New Testament. Are you saying they are fully realized today? (Yes in Christ Jesus. All of the promises are found in Christ Jesus)
Secondly I would like to echo what DTG asked, what does “shortly” mean? Words have meaning. Please do not tell me “shortly,” does not mean exactly what it says when we in the 21st century use it the exact same way. The end of the age and the events all had time text connected to them.
When did Jesus return?
At the destruction of the temple, at the end of the old covenant age which the temple and all its practices were tied to. God vindicated His Son in 70ad.
NHE,
So what did Paul mean when he says
“35 But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” 36 You foolish person! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. 38 But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body. 39 For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish. 40 There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is of one kind, and the glory of the earthly is of another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.
42 So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. 43 It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. 47 The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven.”
If anyone is reading this do you have an imperishable body? Tell that to the doctor who gave me a physical. No matter of fact tell that to my grandmother, or tell that the Christian that died the other day. His body still perished. Maybe I am wrong here but it seems like the Corinthians are asking a question about a different type of body and Paul does an excellent job with this word picture.
So the great white throne judgment has occured? What about the Judment seat of Christ, when we will be rewarded for our faithfulness. That one to? I think this is a serious case of extreme overrealization brother. Not to mention the date for The Revelation seems to be around 90AD so 20 years later John still hadn’t got the news.
Hutch thanks for telling me where you stand.
Msamu,
I have some serious questions. By virtue of your answer to J.R. Miller, am I to understand that EVERYTHING in the bible hinges on whether or not Jesus returned in 70 AD? In other words, does the fate of all mankind rest in eschatology? If that is the case, then why is the gospel proclaimed as it is? Should the gospel really be the death, burial and resurrection of Christ? Shouldn’t it rather be the return of Christ in 70AD? Jesus proclaimed “It is finished” at the cross. Why didn’t He proclaim it in 70AD at the destruction of the temple if that’s where the importance really lies?
Msamu, these are honest questions. Please address them as if you were INSTRUCTING me in truth and not DEFENDING your beliefs. And I have more questions.
Hutch thanks for telling me where you stand.Lionel your date is your date from your side nice try using it.
Some people never look at a verse like Matthew,16:28.where are those people or and did he tell the truth to “them”
Lionel you said when did Jesus come back right.The question that you have to ask yourself is.Who did he tell to look out for the”signs”before he comes.Before we are all over the place with this.
Lionel…
“…Was it wrong for the people to drive planes into the towers back in 01?”
No one Drove any Planes into towers back in 01 (LOL). However, they did fly planes into the towers.
When you look into the reason why this crime was committed, it only strengthens the statements I made in my previous post.
DTG-
After almost 20 years of adhering to the Dispensational Pre-Millennialism position, I recently settled on A-Mil, Partial Preterist, Idealist.
Before my transition, I studied them all Historic Pre-Mil, Post-Mil, Classic A-Mil, Full Preterism etc.
During that time, I got all the debating of the different positions on internet blogs out of my system.
Its not that I cannot debate the different positions, it’s just that I am not interested.
I have repeated my refrain regarding the resurrected body and the Lord’s Supper partly to make a point and partly to just be light hearted regarding this issue.
Usually debating these things online just strengthens people in their current positions.
I never thought that I would change my eschatological beliefs and probably never would have if something more compelling than an online debate forced me to revisit all of the positions in detail. In this, I do not think I am unique.
I do have some serious reservations about the Full Preterist viewpoint as I do not think it correctly takes into account the consistent theme in scripture of “Now” and “Not Yet”.
If you are interested an excellent book that showcases the “Now” and “Not Yet” theme as presented in scripture in Triumph of the Lamb by Johnson and of course Sam Waldron’s End Times Made Simple is excellent as well.
With that said, I never part fellowship over Eschatology.
These are issues everyone must set down in stone and then move forward.
After years and years of teaching Sunday school, conducting discipleship training and preaching from the “pulpit” from time to time, I have come to the conclusion that the church overall is not making disciples and equipping the saints for the work of the ministry. As a result, I feel that I have completely missed the boat so to speak.
I am trying to get to what Lionel described in his post regarding his experience this last Sunday-stay there on a consistent basis-be it in a designated building, in someone’s living room or outdoors.
Nicely stated Hutch
DTG,
I also want to engage but don’t want to engage in this conversation. The first being I am troubled by full preterism by the fact I believe the Gospel (there is no good news if there is no bad and if Satan is judged, and if everyone else has been thrown in the lake of Fire there is no bad news thus eat drink and be merry for tommorow you will die and nothing happens either way) the second reason is this can take quite a bit of time and debating and I am pretty much convinced on my eschatoloigcal position which is Partial Preterist Amill.
So I wait for the glorious return that usher in the fullness of God’s kingdom. It is not an issue of debate because it only really drives my view on Israel and my rejection of the Dispensational hermeneutic. So again to engage in this will not be fruitful because it is something I have worked out, the other things I wrestle with.
Chuck,
What do you think about the Bosnians and Sebrs? Right or wrong?
Bro. Lawrence D.
yes, the Gospel is the life, suffering, death, resurrection and the return of Christ.
I’m not sure what this question means “Why didn’t He proclaim it in 70AD at the destruction of the temple if that’s where the importance really lies?”
Proclaim what is AD70?
More then happy to answer your questions, it might be more appropriate to discus this topic on my blog or via Phone, if your interested leave a message on my site and I’ll give you my phone number
Hutch you said “I do have some serious reservations about the Full Preterist viewpoint as I do not think it correctly takes into account the consistent theme in scripture of “Now” and “Not Yet”. ”
1-Who came up with this “now” and Not yet”
2-consistent with who’s scriptural theme???
I leave with this:
Christ said Matt 24:14
Paul said Col 1:6, 1:23
We say today??????
Msamu-
Question 1. Answer. The Holy Spirit
Question 2. Answer. The Holy Spirit’s
Hutch and Lionel the reason that I wrote no#39 is to say. That this is something you accept or reject it’s not that hard. I told bro, Lawrence aka the professor that i didn’t want to get into this. But Lionel brought it up. A person has to study for them selves. It’s only “hard” when you been told something from traditions of men. I like what you said about parting over eschatology. There are people on both sides who really see the other is confused on the matter. The debate stuff online over the phone, live, been there done that. About the “class systems” that men set up we didn’t do this about “some end times”. It’s funny because that’s not a verse, it’s the “time of the end” of what end! to those watching? My problem is that there are to many and I mean to many verses that scream for “time” relevance. For the support for the Full preterit system. Now the problems that I have with the others class system. They really have to come up with some one liners if they are question about the “time” statements. Hutch yes making disciples is the most important thing to do. Now this is when I cry for the Jerusalem counsel. NHE you told the truth about his coming. The “future” about the time of the end! was for them, but you will enjoy the finished promises that he kept to them. Always like to end it with this. Proverbs,13:12 Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when desire cometh, it is a tree of life. I think “they” was glad to read this in the first century.
Msamu here was your response to J.R. Miller:
“What if Jesus has not yet come ?
:then Jesus was not the Christ, the bible is a lie, and your not saved
What if the peace we are specking of is biblical?
:then Jesus could not be Christ, the bible is a lie, and your not saved
What if what we were taught is right?
:then Jesus was not the Christ, the bible is a lie, and your not saved
What if the kingdom of God is of this world AND of the world to come?
:then Jesus was is the Christ, the bible is a lie, and you will never be saved”
(BLD) It seems that in this response you have EVERYTHING concerning Christianity riding on the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. However, as far as I understand the bible, Jesus’ RESURRECTION is the proof that He is the Christ. I don’t believe that the bible teaches His return as the proof that He is Christ. I’ve never heard anyone make the proof of Him being Christ rest upon when He returns. So I’m confused.
I know that you believe that Jesus came back in 70 A.D. (For some reason Full Preterist rarely want to be held strictly to that date). But no where in the scripture does Jesus say “I’m coming back in 70 AD”. So not coming back in 70 A.D. would not automatically make the bible a lie as you stated. Secondly, no where in scripture does Jesus ever say “The destruction of the temple is synonymous with My return.” Therefore, again the two not being the same thing would not make the bible a lie either. Again, I’m confused.
The 70 A.D. thing is also why I was asking why didn’t Christ proclaim “It is finished” at the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. if our salvation hinges on that event.
My second question would be, “How does the bible define the peace that is associated with Christ’ return?”. Since you believe that we are confused concerning that peace by the fact that we deny it is present, I would love for you to do a survey of the state of the world and explain how we’ve got the idea so wrong.
I don’t mind anyone questioning what they were previously taught by any man. That doesn’t bother me one bit. We must all take personal responsibility before God on judgment day (unless that already took place too) so I don’t see why we wouldn’t now.
I know that I’m almost asking you to become a bible dictionary but several words and phrases need to be defined. For instance, the word “kingdom” needs to be definded. Are we talking about the “Kingdom of God”, the “Kingdom of Heaven”, or Christ’ Kingdom? Are they one and the same. Also, the phrase “not of this world” has to be defined. Is the phrase “not of this world” the same as “not on this physical earth”? We know that Jesus told Pilate “My kingdom is not of this world.” (John 18:36a) But did he me not on the earth. I believe that there is a sense in which the kingdom of God IS on the earth. In Luke 17:21b Jesus is recorded as having said “for, behold the kingdom of God is within you.” The ones he said that to were presently on earth.
I’m again asking you to instruct me. I am putting the burden of proof in your hands. I’d rather you did it here while being challenged rather than in a setting where you can avoid answering direct questions by steering the conversation in the direction that you want it to go. I’m the student so my questions should drive the discussion. And in the presence of others perhaps you will be able to avoid the temptation of dismissing my honest questions.
Msamu-
You said:
I leave with this:
Christ said Matt 24:14
Paul said Col 1:6, 1:23
We say today??????
I am not sure what “we” say, but I say the Amen, the so be it to Matt 24:14, Col. 1:6, 1:23
Just an honest question:
Why do some folks start interacting in this forum and then make the suggestion or in “Pastor” Lance’s case insist that the forum/location of a discussion change in order for it to continue?
I have never understood that.
Hutch: your answer Holy Spirit, Holy Spirit, is unacceptable the cults say the same thing
the you must speck in tongues, the name it claim it and on and on. Ask them they’ll tell you,
the Holy Spirit, Holy Spirit…..
Also I do not mind discussing this topic here, but this is LD’s blog and I don’t want to interject a subject that LD is not willing to give some time to. If he gives the go-a -head, then we will move on.
——————————————————————————
Bro. Lawrence D:
I don’t have all the answers bro. I am willing to discuess with you this topic.
Saying “And in the presence of others perhaps you will be able to avoid the temptation of dismissing my honest questions”
I will not dismiss any question, I’ am eager to discuess this with you, I am a better talker then writer, again if you respond on my site ( all are welcome) I will give you my phone number, that will show sincerity on your part.
Bro LD:
The “when” in when he returns is not the answer to over 100 time relevant scripture’s that clearly state his return was evident, the “When” is not the answer to Paul when he said he preached nothing but the “HOPE” of Israel, what was that HOPE? The when was then, do I fully understand it, no. But I also don’t understand how God became a man, or the mystery of the God head, only by faith do I believe, so I believe it when Jesus said to his contemporaries, the generation that was standing before him, the elect that was to witness the greatest event in human history would not pass until ALL was fulfilled, I’m not sure if he meant “now” “but not yet”
Msamu-
I believe that God’s Word teaches that the scriptures were given as men were moved by inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
The consistent presentation within scripture of “now” and “not yet” as it relates to eschatology was written by the Holy Spirit.
Are you saying that believing in the inspiration of scripture is cultic?
I was under the impression that the main three bench-marks of a cult are as follows:
1) Denial of the deity of Christ
2) Extra-biblical revelation
3) Control oriented authoritarianism.
None of which I adhere to.
As far as debating Full or Partial Preterism, my post above indicates that I am not interested.
I was responding to two questions that you posed to me.
As I see it, Brother Lawrence D is the one that is asking for clarification on your views. I have already done an extensive study on Full Preterism and reject its conclusions.
Hutch:
I’m not saying that believing in the inspiration of scripture is cultic what I’m saying is I reject “your” conclusion that the consistent presentation within scripture of “now” and “not yet” as it relates to eschatology was written by the Holy Spirit. I see it as a way of justifying futurism, I reject your understating not the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Msamu-
Well, then we are on the same page about the inspiration of scripture and probably on a lot of others things.
But being two equally capable and intelligent individuals, we have studied the same scriptures and have come to a different conclusion.
That is what is known as an impasse.
I will just repeat what I wrote to DTG and leave it at that:
“Usually debating these things online just strengthens people in their current positions.
I never thought that I would change my eschatological beliefs and probably never would have if something more compelling than an online debate forced me to revisit all of the positions in detail. In this, I do not think I am unique.”
God bless.
Msamu,
I appreciate at least an attempt to address my concerns. I don’t necessarily believe that I am walking away from this discussion with any more clarification on the topic than I’ve had previously.
DTG and I had a very fruitful discussion this morning in which he at least got me to thinking about how important it is to factor in the “who” that is being addressed when interpreting biblical passages. Though I believed there to be some major inconsistencies in the application, I thought the principle was solid. I was hoping to have the same appreciation through our conversations as you defined the terms I asked about.
Hopefully you will reconsider doing so.
DTG and MSAUMU,
What can I with confidence say is normative for the church in reference to the Red Letters? In other words, when Jesus is talking to the disciples specifically what exactly can I apply to those who are disciples today. I need to see a consistent hermeneutic here. If you take one of the things said as normative why should I not take the other as normative?
and you can LD, my phone number is on my site
lionelwoods7,
letter’s in red? What color were the letters when Christ spoke them to the people standing in front of him? Why do we choose to ignore what’s printed on the paper? Was Christ talking to you and I when we said “this is a wicked generation” no that’s for the Jews, we want
what the elect chosen from the beginning of time were to witness and partake of. What about them, what if you were standing looking in to Christ eyes as he said “be assured, this generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled” would you have believe
“now but “not yet” ????
Michael,
Thanks but I don’t think this answers my question. I am saying what is your hermeneutic principle to interpret what is normative and what is for those that the words were specifically spoken to? Jesus uses the words you, they and them many times, how do you decide which applies to us and which applies to them? There were many standing listening to Jesus then, do those things not apply to us since we were not present?
Wait to I get home lol
What is normative for them first we ask you this. Also I would like no why is it normative for them. If you are disciple of today what is normative is this. First take out the “time relevance statements for you” this is “not” normative hermeneutics. This is for you to do here!
1 Love one another if you are a disciple
2 Forgive seventy times seventy
3 Always prey and not faint
4 Believe by faith and not by sight
5 Share the the gospel to other’s
6 Don’t lie
7 Live holy life as best as you can live in Christ
8 Make disciple of men to the glory of God
9 If married love you wife
10 Help other believer’s in Christ
Yes more can be written down no need you get the picture.
The problem is that who ever preach to you about Matthew,
24 like today’s normative you need go back and talk to them. The pastors/elders/leaders/ need to break it down because that is were it was taught from. Then they would have to ask themselves a question who taught me this and so on. He talking to us today you have to read the bible this way to make it normative. Btw You people get all the benefits of a complete fulfilled promises to them after you die. Your rewards,tree of life,no more sufferings, that body
which is?”heaven”, the prepare place!etc,etc,etc, yo’ lionel
you could call me man if you want to on this stuff when you are ready. Nobody “has” all the answer it is by faith!!
There are biblical principals that have eternal consequences for mankind
There are time relevant statements that have consequences for Israel; in order to have a correct hermeneutic these time relevant statements cannot and must not be ignored:
Let’s look at one statement:
Matt 24:34 verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Let’s examine the statement:
Who was Christ talking too? Who is the “You” and where else is the same word used and how.
Example one : Matt 3:7 O generations of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Question: Should I apply the “you” to a future event?
My answer would be no, why. Because what proceeds the “you”. context tells me that John is referring to the Pharisees the religious leaders of a perverse nation.
Example two: John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life
In this statement the “you” is followed by an eternal statement (HE), Christ is talking to the “you” but makes an eternal definitive. So the “you” not only affects the people Christ is talking to but all who are hears, believes.
Back to Matt 24:34 following the “you” statement Christ uses the word “this” demonstrative pronoun,
Now here’s where it get’s tricky, below are the definitions given for the word Generation
1) fathered, birth, nativity
2 ) that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family
(a) the several ranks of natural descent, the successive members of a genealog
(b) metaph. a group of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character
1) esp. in a bad sense, a perverse nation
(3) the whole multitude of men living at the same time
(4) an age (i.e. the time ordinarily occupied be each successive generation), a space of 30 – 33 years
If the authors wanted to portray the word generation with a more ethnic flavor they could have used the word: genos
(1)kindred
(a) offspring
(b) family
(c) stock, tribe, nation
(2) i.e. nationality or descent from a particular people
( a ) the aggregate of many individuals of the same nature, kind, sort
Galatians 1:14, “and I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries among my countrymen (genos).”
in conclusion the “you” refers back to the disciples, “this” generation as used in (Matt 24:34) (the whole multitude of men living at the same time) not
Genos, stock, tribe, nation.
This is how I determine what applies to me and what applied to them, since I’m not of the generation elected by God to partake of the greatest single event in human history I cannot transpose historical events ” their now” and apply them to a future “not Yet” event, this I believe is an erroneous form of hermeneutics. I can on the other hand apply the eternal statements to myself and all of mankind.
I’m not sure if this is a correct hermeneutic, but my dots connect.
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
(1 Corinthians 11:23-26)
Full-Preterism teaches that the New Covenant did not start until 70 AD.
If that is so, why did Christ state that the New Covenant began at the cross?
Why, did Christ and Paul instruct believers to celebrate the New Covenant in the observance of the Lords Supper prior to 70 AD?
If Christ came back in 70 AD, does that mean we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper since we are told the celebration of the Lord’s Supper was to proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes?
Good resources:
Matthew 24: The Achilles Heel of Full Preterism
http://lovebrokethru.com/papers/Matthew_24.pdf
Full Preterism and the Lord’s Supper
http://lovebrokethru.com/papers/Supper.pdf
Hutch how are you, hopefully doing good I take it. First things I would like to say is who is Micheal W. Adams and what does he believe. So I could point out the Achilles heel of his futurism system if you can give it to me. The last point is that if you study Hebrews chapter’s “8 and 9″ it will explain when the covenant changes no matter who says what on either side. Btw I’m curios to see how this full preterism person taught this. Can you provide the “info” from the “full preterits person” who taught this. Not from Micheal W. Adams, there name and the article on it. Once again it’s all in the those two chapter’s from Paul who we give the credit to on the book. Just like in every system everybody doesn’t agree on everything. In our “full perterism” are people like everybody else. Still like to see the article inside of the full perterist gang. The futurist gang we know why they do it and no fuss with each other. Because of these words which is for “you.” See no#65 by Msamu
Full-Preterism teaches that the New Covenant did not start until 70 AD.
If that is so, why did Christ state that the New Covenant began at the cross?
Why, did Christ and Paul instruct believers to celebrate the New Covenant in the observance of the Lords Supper prior to 70 AD?
If Christ came back in 70 AD, does that mean we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper since we are told the celebration of the Lord’s Supper was to proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes?
who is Michael W. Adams and what does he believe?
Who am I? Who are you? Who is Lionel? Who are the Full Preterists? Who are the Partial Preterists? Who are the Dispensationalists? Who are the Pre-Mil’s? Who are the Post-Mil’s?
Ummm, I guess we are all believers in Christ.
And what does he, you, me, we and they believe?
Different and various things.
There are links provided that will explain what Michael Adams believes.
He is A-Mil, Partial Preterist.
If your question is who is he and why should we believe him?
We can play that game all day long, who are you and why should I believe you?
Who am I and why should you believe me?
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
(1 Corinthians 11:23-26)
Full-Preterism teaches that the New Covenant did not start until 70 AD.
If that is so, why did Christ state that the New Covenant began at the cross?
Why, did Christ and Paul instruct believers to celebrate the New Covenant in the observance of the Lords Supper prior to 70 AD?
If Christ came back in 70 AD, does that mean we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper since we are told the celebration of the Lord’s Supper was to proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes?
If Jesus has already returned, I am disappointed with my resurrection body.
If Christ has already returned, then we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper.
Do you celebrate the Lord’s Supper?
If so, why?
Did Christ lie when He said the New Covenant was inaugurated by His blood/the cross?
Was Paul teaching false doctrine when he taught the Corinthians to celebrate the Lord’s Supper prior to what the Full Preterists believe was the start of the New Covenant?
Hutch said “I will just repeat what I wrote to DTG and leave it at that: “Usually debating these things online just strengthens people in their current positions. I never thought that I would change my eschatological beliefs and probably never would have if something more compelling than an online debate forced me to revisit all of the positions in detail. In this, I do not think I am unique.”
Hutch, I understand your multi-schizophrenic A-Mil, Partial Preterist, Idealist can be confusing, But are you in this discussion or not???,
I’m just having fun.
Do you wish to answer the questions so I can understand and be persuaded by your Full Preterists beliefs?
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
(1 Corinthians 11:23-26)
Full-Preterism teaches that the New Covenant did not start until 70 AD.
If that is so, why did Christ state that the New Covenant began at the cross?
Why, did Christ and Paul instruct believers to celebrate the New Covenant in the observance of the Lords Supper prior to 70 AD?
If Christ came back in 70 AD, does that mean we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper since we are told the celebration of the Lord’s Supper was to proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes?
If Jesus has already returned, I am disappointed with my resurrection body.
If Christ has already returned, then we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper.
Do you celebrate the Lord’s Supper?
If so, why?
Did Christ lie when He said the New Covenant was inaugurated by His blood/the cross?
Was Paul teaching false doctrine when he taught the Corinthians to celebrate the Lord’s Supper prior to what the Full Preterists believe was the start of the New Covenant?
Hutch, I understand your multi-schizophrenic A-Mil, Partial Preterist, Idealist can be confusing,
Ouch, you hurt my feelings. I know you are but what I am I? Na, na, na…Grin.
I’m not confused, are you?
I like you think that I have it all worked out.
Now get to answering those questions so you can convince me of your position.
I’m waiting.
You do have an answer don’t you?
LOL!!!
Msamu,
Wait. Has this turned into ad-hominum argumentation? Hutch asked what appears to me to be simple questions. I asked for what was to me simple definitions of words and phrases. Why have things deteriorated into checking pedigrees (who is Michael Adams) and questioning a brother’s mental state (multi-schizophrenic?)?
You’ve been asked plainly about the significance of Christ’ return in regards to the Lord’s Supper. No answer. You’ve been asked about the inaugaration of the New Covenant. No answer. You’ve been asked if you meant to convey that the truth of Jesus’ being Christ hinged on His return and not on His resurrection as the bible teaches. No answer.
Msamu, it seems that I was mistaken in thinking that having you address these things on this public forum would persuade you to actually answer honest questions. Here was my statement:
“I am putting the burden of proof in your hands. I’d rather you did it here while being challenged rather than in a setting where you can avoid answering direct questions by steering the conversation in the direction that you want it to go. I’m the student so my questions should drive the discussion. And in the presence of others perhaps you will be able to avoid the temptation of dismissing my honest questions.”
But as is your apparent MO (remember that fiasco over at Pulpit Pimps?), you really don’t plan on answering these questions. Here it was I wanted to give you another chance without the vicious attacks and dismissals that happened over there and you yet refuse to answer honest questions. Even just plain yes or no questions you refuse to answer. Why not just say that you don’t plan to answer any questions so that seekers such as myself can just move on?
Just know that you’re losing a lot of credibility by following this intellectually dishonest path.
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
Well Hutch He came, how do I know he came?
Matt24:14 Mark 16:14-18
The Gospel had to be preached to
-the whole world
-all nations
-all of creation
“Then shall the end come”
below is the inspired word of God
Colossians 1:6 which is come unto you, as [it is] in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as [it doth] also in you, since the day ye heard [of it], and knew the grace of God in truth:
Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.
Romans 16:25-26 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
2Tim 4:6,17 For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. Notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me; that by me the preaching might be fully known, and [that] all the Gentiles might hear: and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion.
Col 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and [be] not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, [and] which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;
The Pauline scriptures are pretty clear that fulfillment of the words of Jesus came to pass in the first century, unless of course Paul was lying?
So you see Hutch Scripture not I answered your question, are we to partake of the Lord’s Supper, well they were told to do it “until he comes” Matt 24:29,30,34 says “immediately after the tribulation, the sign of the son of man in heaven, the generation that witnessed the events of Matt 24:5-34 would not pass until all these things be fulfilled. Check out the 35th verse, was Christ lying????
Conclusion: Jesus’s prophecies concerning the gospel being preached to the nations, whole world and all of creation were fulfilled inside the first century.
Hay LD, you’re all in the kool aid but you don’t know the flavor. Hutch said that he would not discuss this topic, my last post was addressing LW7 question,
Hutch pops up, hay is Hutch in it or not he needs to make up his mind,
BLD, you need to stop spinning, You’ve gotten answers from DTG, yet you continue to act as if you haven’t, maybe you guy’s need to consolidate your questions so they can be dealt with in an orderly fashion, not to say I’ve yet to hear an answer to any of the scriptures I presented. It’s like a school yard fight, you guy’s are lined up one behind another to fight one kid, we can do this, but please one at a time
Msamu-
Hutch pops up, hay is Hutch in it or not he needs to make up his mind,
Uh, uumm, er, hmmm….
I noticed that you did not answer the questions.
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
(1 Corinthians 11:23-26)
Full-Preterism teaches that the New Covenant did not start until 70 AD.
If that is so, why did Christ state that the New Covenant began at the cross?
Why, did Christ and Paul instruct believers to celebrate the New Covenant in the observance of the Lords Supper prior to 70 AD?
If Christ came back in 70 AD, does that mean we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper since we are told the celebration of the Lord’s Supper was to proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes?
If Jesus has already returned, I am disappointed with my resurrection body.
If Christ has already returned, then we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper.
Do you celebrate the Lord’s Supper?
If so, why?
Did Christ lie when He said the New Covenant was inaugurated by His blood/the cross?
Was Paul teaching false doctrine when he taught the Corinthians to celebrate the Lord’s Supper prior to what the Full Preterists believe was the start of the New Covenant?
Hutch their’s no such thing as a multi-schizophrenic it was an attempt at being light hearted, BLD’s got his panties all up is a bunch about my comment, (woops their I go again) so to you and BLD and to anyone that was offended please accept my apologies.
The short of it this BLD, If Christ said he was going to do something I.E Return and did not according to scripture.
Dut 18:20-22 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, how shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that [is] the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, [but] the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Since God cannot tell a lie, Christ who’s claiming to be God stated that events that would clearly confirm his claim to be The Christ (one lie disqualifies him as Christ) are clearly laid out in old as well as NT scripture, was he specking presumptuously? If yes then he cannot be the Christ, even if he was born of a virgin
did miracles, crucified on a cross, rose from the dead, but did not full all then he lied and cannot be the Christ
The Lord’s Supper
Is it still necessary after 70 AD?
By Richard K. McPherson
This topic is discussed among Preterits, today. Some say that this and baptism are still required and other say that it is not. So, who is right and who is wrong? This article is not to say one is right and the other is wrong, but to let the scriptures speak for itself. If you feel that I am taking scriptures out of context, please tell me.
Let us start in 1 Corinthians 11:17-34. While quoting this text, I will be adding the Greek meaning to certain words. I hope this will make the text easier to understand.
“In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your meetings do more harm than good. In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, (“church” being people NOT the building) there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. Not doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval. When you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat, for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry and another gets drunk. Don’t you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not! For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed took bread, and broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance (call to mind or a memorial) of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim (declare) the Lord’s death until he comes. (leaving one place and going to another) Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will guilty of sinning against (liable for) the body and blood of the Lord. A man ought to examine (test or prove) himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing (to distinguish) the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. But if we judged ourselves, we would no come under judgment. (pass judgment on or condemn) When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world. So then, my brothers, when you come together (assemble) to eat, wait for each other. If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment…..”
In this text, it appears that the church in Corinth was having a full course meal along with the “Lord’s Supper”. Some were eating and getting drunk, while other were not eating at all and going hungry. In addition, in this text it is saying that the Lord’s Supper is to be viewed as a memorial of Jesus’ death on the cross. If we are still to partake of the Lord’s Supper and we partake it in an “unworthy manner” what judgment are we under? Is the judgment that Paul is talking about the 70 AD judgment or a future judgment? How are we partaking the Lord’s Supper and where is the scripture to prove it? The scriptures clearly teach that the bread means his body (Matthew 26:26, Mark 14:22, Luke 22:19, 1 Corinthians 10:17) and his body is the church (Colossians 1:24) and the “cup”, ”fruit of the vine”, his blood”, which means the New Covenant. In 70 AD, the New Covenant was fully completed. The first century Christians was looking forward for the New Covenant through the blood of Christ and was told to remember it.
In Matthew’s account, the disciples came to Jesus and asked Him, “Where do you want us to make preparations for you to eat the Passover?”(26:17) It is from here that man has comes up with the phase “The Lord’s Supper”. This phase is never used in the Bible, but is taught as fact.
Matthew 26:27-28 puts it this way.
“….Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father’s kingdom.”
Luke 22:14 and 18 puts it this way. “….I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you, I will not eat it again until if finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.” Verse 18: “For I tell you I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” Verse 20: “…This cup is the new covenant in my blood…”
According to the context, Jesus will not eat what? The Passover, until when? 70 AD, at the fulfillment of the kingdom of God. Notice it is still talking about the Passover not the Lord’s Supper. Why would Jesus remember his own death, burial, and resurrection?
I would like to pose some questions, here.
When was “until that day”? 70 AD
Who was Jesus taking to in this text? His disciples
When did the “Father’s kingdom” come? 70 AD (1 Corinthians 15:24)
When did the “new covenant” come? 70 AD
If the blood is the “Covenant” or in the other gospels, the “New Covenant” and the first century Christians were looking forward for that New Covenant, then yes the meaning of the supper would make sense. If Christ has not come then we will still are living under the Old Covenant and still looking forward for a New Covenant. (Hebrews 8:13, 10:8-9) The supper would still be just like the first century Christians. The forgiveness of sin did not happen until Jesus’ return. (Hebrews 9:23-28, Luke 21:28, Revelation 10:7) We are under the New Covenant, today. Everything has been fulfilled.
Now let us define something here. What do these words or phases mean, for example: In Acts 2:42, says,
“They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.”
Also in Acts 20:7: “On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight.” After Eutychus fell into a deep sleep, fell out a three-story building, and was pronounce dead. Paul raised him back to life, verse 10. “Then he went upstairs again and broke bread and ate…”
Cecil Hook wrote in Free in Christ about this text. “We use this text to prove that the Lord’s Supper it be taken on Sunday’s, (We call this the Lord’s day for some reason, like Monday and the other are not the Lord’s Day, emph. RKM), BUT we assume that this “breaking of bread” is the Communion rather than a love feast or fellowship meal. Although there is no proof of it, we will grant that it was the Communion for argument’s sake. If they met to commune, it does not indicate that they had been doing so previously or that they continued to do so the next week and thereafter. There is no indication that this was done except on that particular weekend. This is the only time the breaking of bread is mentioned in the connection with the first day of the week!
There is no clear example of the Lord’s Supper ever being eaten on the first day of the week. At Toras, it they met according to Roman (and our) manner of reckoning time, they met to eat it on our Sunday night, but did not partake until Monday morning, because of Paul’s long discourse. If they followed the Jewish calendar, they met to partake of it on our Saturday night. Would we be right in participation on Saturday night or Monday morning?”
What is “the breaking of bread”?
The “breaking of bread” is generally associated with the Lord’s Supper. Nevertheless, there is nothing in the context to indicate that this activity is the Lord’s Supper. The expression breaking of bread is also an idiom for a common meal. In fact, in Acts 2:46-47, one reads: Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people”. If the “breaking of bread’ refers to the Lord’s Supper, then they observed the communion a daily basis, not just on Sundays.
Which of these nine examples of details concerning the so call “Lord’s Supper” are binding? It was eaten:
1. at night
2. upstairs
3. in midweek
4. during another meal
5. with no women present
6. one loaf
7. of unleavened bread
8. one cup
9. of Passover wine which could not have been fresh grape juice at that season.
Which exemplified details are binding and which are not? If God means what he says and He says what he means, then by examples and with the right attitude the Lord’s Supper should be kept. The first century Christians had hope by looking for salvation and the resurrection, after 70 AD we have assurance and everything has been fulfilled.
Is there a difference between the “Lord’s supper” and “supper of the Lamb”? Are there two different types of suppers being taught in the Bible?
Turn to Revelation 19:6-9:
“’…. Hallelujah!! For our Lord God Almighty reigns. Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come and his bride has make herself ready. Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear.” Then the angel said to me, “Write, Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!’….”
Also in verse 17: “And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, Come, gather together for the great supper of God,…”
What is this “supper of the Lamb” or “supper of God”? In 19:6-9 it is talking about a wedding supper. To me the first thing that comes to mind in Matthew 25:1-13.
“At that time the kingdom of heaven (kingdom of God, both are the same) will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and when out to meet the bridegroom. Five of them were foolish and five were wise. The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. The wise, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. The bridegroom was a long time in coming and thy all became drowsy and fell asleep. At midnight, the cry rang out: ‘Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’ The all the virgins’ woke up and trimmed their lamps. The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil’ our lamps are going out.’ ‘No’, they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both you and us. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’ “But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in and with him to the wedding banquet (or supper). “Later the others also came. ‘Sir! Sir!’ they said. ‘Open the door for us! “But he replied, ‘I tell you the truth, I don’t know you,’ “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.”
This sounds much like Matthew 24:36,42-44, All it talking about 70 AD.
What did the “Passover” mean to the Jews? In Exodus 12, it describes the requirements, when to eat it, how to eat it and it also describes what the Passover meant. It was also called “Feast of Unleavened Bread, verse 17. The Jews were told to get the “Passover lamb”, slaughter it and take its blood and put it on the top and both sides of the doorframe, verse 21-22. In 13:3, it tells us that the children of Israel were to “Commemorate this day, the day you came out of Egypt, out of slavery…” Also in 13:14-16). They were to do this ordinance at the appointed time year after year, verse 10.
Jesus is described as the “Passover Lamb” in 1 Corinthians 5:7. His blood was on the top of the cross, because of the thorns on his head and the blood from his back and his blood from his feet. There was blood on both sides, his hands. The first century people were told how to eat it (Matthew 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-25, Luke 22:17-20, 1 Corinthians 11:23-25), when to eat it and why eat it.
Look at the chart below:
OT Passover Physical slavery———Egypt————unspotted lamb———–year after year
Spiritual Slavery———-Sin—————unspotted lamb———–year after year
This stopped completely before the fall of Judaism when the sacrifices ceased. Hebrews 7-10 tells us that what the priest had to do year after year for sin.
First Century Physical slavery———Egypt————unspotted lamb———–year after year
This “Passover:” meal was still being preformed in the first century.
Spiritual slavery——–the law ————-Jesus Christ———–Until He Comes
Let’s look at this phrase “until He comes” in 1 Corinthians 11:26:
(ALT) For as often as you* shall be eating this bread and drinking this cup, you* proclaim the death of the Lord, until He comes.
(ASV) For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord’s death till he come.
(BBE) For whenever you take the bread and the cup you give witness to the Lord’s death till he comes.
(CEV) The Lord meant that when you eat this bread and drink from this cup, you tell about his death until he comes.
(GNB) This means that every time you eat this bread and drink from this cup you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
(ISV) For as often as you eat this bread and drink from this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
(KJV+) For1063 as often as3740 ye eat2068, 302 this5126 bread, 740 and2532 drink4095, 302 this5124 cup, 4221 ye do show2605 the3588 Lord’s2962 death2288 till891 he(3739) come.2064
(LITV) For as often as you may eat this bread, and drink this cup, you solemnly proclaim the death of the Lord, until He shall come.
(MKJV) For “as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you show” the Lord’s death until He shall come.
(YLT) for as often as ye may eat this bread, and this cup may drink, the death of the Lord ye do shew forth–till he may come;
Albert Barns put it this way, “Till he come – Until he returns to judge the world. This demonstrates:
(1) That it was the steady belief of the primitive church that the Lord Jesus would return to judge the world; and,
(2) That it was designed that this ordinance should be perpetuated, and observed to the end of time. In every generation, therefore, and in every place where there are Christians, it is to be observed, until the Son of God shall return; and the necessity of its observance shall cease only when the whole body of the redeemed shall be permitted to see their Lord, and there shall be no need of those emblems to remind them of him, for all shall see him as he is.
(Comments RKM: When did Jesus return to judge the world?)
John Gills says this, “ye do show the Lord’s death till he come; or rather, as it may be rendered in the imperative mood, as an exhortation, direction or command, “show ye the Lord’s death till he come”; since everyone that eats and drinks at the Lord’s table does not show forth his death, which is the great end to be answered by it; for the design of the institution of it is to declare that Christ died for the sins of his people: to represent him as crucified; to set forth the manner of his sufferings and death, by having his body wounded, bruised, and broken, and his blood shed; to express the blessings and benefits which come by his death, and his people’s faith of interest in them; and to show their sense of gratitude, and declare their thankfulness for them; and all this, “till he come”; which shows the continuance of this ordinance, which is to last till Christ’s second coming, where the carnal ordinances of the former dispensation were shaken and removed; and also the continuance of Gospel ministers to the end of the world, to administer it, and of churches to whom it is to be administered: this assures of the certainty of Christ’s second coming; as it leads back to his coming in the flesh, suffering and dying in our stead, and thereby obtaining redemption for us; it leads forward to expect and believe he will come again, to put us into the full possession of the salvation he is the author of; when there will be no more occasion for this ordinance, nor any other, but all will cease, and God will be all in all. The apostle here refers to a custom used by the Jews in the night of the Passover, to show forth the reason of their practice, and that institution to their children; when either (u).
“the son asked the father, or if the son had not understanding (enough to ask), then the father taught him, saying, how different is this night from all other nights? for in all other nights we eat leavened and unleavened bread, but in this night only unleavened; in all other nights we eat the rest of herbs, but in this night bitter herbs; in all other nights we eat flesh roasted, broiled, and boiled, in this night only roasted; in all other nights we wash once, in this night twice; and as elsewhere (w) it is added, in all other nights we eat sitting or lying, in this night all of us lie; and according to the capacity of the child, the father teaches him,”
particularly he was to inform him what these several things showed forth, or declared (x); as that
“the Passover מגיד, “declared”, or “showed forth”, that the Lord passed over the houses of our fathers in Egypt; the bitter herbs “showed forth”, that the Egyptians made the lives of our fathers bitter in Egypt; and the unleavened bread “declared” that they were redeemed; and all these things are called הגדה, “the declaration”, or showing forth:”
and there is a treatise called הגדה של פסח, “the showing forth of the Passover”; in which, besides the things mentioned, and many others, it is observed (y), that it was commanded the Jews לספר, “to declare” the going out of Egypt, and that everyone that diligently declares the going out of Egypt, is praiseworthy: now the apostle observes this end of the Lord’s supper, to show forth his death, in opposition to the notion of the “judaizing” Christians at Corinth, who thought of nothing else but the showing forth of the Passover, and the declaration of that deliverance and redemption wrought for the people of Israel; whereas the true and only intent of it was to show forth the death of Christ, redemption by him, and the greatness of his love expressed therein, and which is to be continued till his second coming (Comments RKM: When was Jesus’ Second Coming? The Passover brought forth life, Jesus destroyed death and brought life in 70 AD. See article: Does Satan Exist Today); whereas the time was come when it should “be no more said, the Lord liveth, that brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt”, Jer_16:14.
(u) Misn. Pesach. c. 10. sect. 4. Haggadah Shel. Pesach. p. 5. (w) Maimon. Chametz Umetzah, c. 8. sect. 2. (x) Moses Kotsensis Mitzvot Tora prec. aff. 41. (y) P. 5, 6. Ed. Rittangel. & Seder. Tephillot. Ed. Basil. fol. 243. 1.
The “Lord’s Supper” was not necessary after the fall of Judaism. The Bible says that Jesus paid the price for sin once for all. (1 Peter 3:18, Hebrews 10:2,10, 7:27)
Read the section on sin and the law in my article “Does Satan Exist Today?” for more information.
I myself believe that the so call “Lord’s Supper” in not necessary today. I have seen that even in the Preterist camp there are some who down right refuse to be consistent with scripture. At the same time, I am not saying that the people who still partake the “Lord’s Supper” are wrong. It is because of our freedom in Christ we can disagree on this topic. This comment could be said about baptism also. (I also believe that baptism in not necessary after 70 AD. That article is on the way.) This article is just food for thought. I believe that a person can go too far with Preterism and I do not believe I have. Some believe that it is ok to have more that one wife after 70AD in which I disagree with. I try to hold God in the “Highest Honor” and His word is truth.
Richard K. McPherson
(903) 633-2189 Copyrighted 2002
Hutch there it is o.k. now what ever you guys see that up to you. 2 there are full perterist who disagree with Richard K. McPherson on this point. There are people on both sides in futurism and Preterism that make there own rules about the bible and what they believe in. 2 Tim,2:15.
Msamu-
I’m still having fun and smiling, I do not offend easy.
Your kool-aid drinking brother in Christ.
Seriously though, does the Full Preterist position have an answer to the questions I have asked?
Here is what I am getting from your responses:
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
(1 Corinthians 11:23-26)
Full-Preterism teaches that the New Covenant did not start until 70 AD.
Q. If that is so, why did Christ state that the New Covenant began at the cross?
A. Full Preterism does not know, as Full Preterism is sure that the New Covenant did not start until 70 AD but Full Preterism is sure that Christ did not lie.
Q. Why, did Christ and Paul instruct believers to celebrate the New Covenant in the observance of the Lords Supper prior to 70 AD?
A. Full Preterism is not sure why-but they know Christ was not mistaken and that He did not lie.
Q. If Christ came back in 70 AD, does that mean we should stop celebrating the Lord’s Supper since we are told the celebration of the Lord’s Supper was to proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes?
A. Yes, since Christ has returned Full Preterists should not and do not celebrate the Lord’s Supper.
Q. Do you celebrate the Lord’s Supper?
A. See Above.
Q. If so, why?
A. See above.
Q. Did Christ lie when He said the New Covenant was inaugurated by His blood/the cross?
A. Full Preterism believes that Christ never lied, Full Preterism has no answer for this seeming contradiction between when Christ says the New Covenant started and when Full Preterism say it started.
Q. Was Paul teaching false doctrine when he taught the Corinthians to celebrate the Lord’s Supper prior to when the Full Preterists believe was the start of the New Covenant?
A. Paul’s words as contained in scripture do not present false doctrine, but Full Preterism is not sure why he would teach the believers to memorialize the New Covenant prior to when Full Preterism says the New Covenant started.
That’s what I have gotten so far from your responses.
Let me know if this is not an accurate representation of what you believe regarding these issues.
Hutch I don’t know about the AD 70 thing
Full-Preterist has differing opinions
Futurists also have differing opinions.
I’m not sure what that says about either camp, nevertheless
Paul said “do it till he comes” I believed he came so
I do not partake,
Having said that I can say in light of Christ statement about
Putting new wine in old wineskins, I can understand it.
Please see the parable of the ten virgins
BTW we are having fun to will there always will be question. In the changing of the guard. We have bunch of question but there are turn back with a question it’s cool used to it lol.
DTG-
I was writing the response to Msamu as you were positing your response.
Thank you for your response, I will be happy to read Mr. McPherson’s opinions on the issue so I can see the answers to my questions from a Full Preterist viewpoint.
I will not even ask you the question that Msamu did-who is this Mr. Mcpherson.
I will read it and give it consideration.
Did you guys read what Michael Adams wrote?
It is lengthy so I will not post it, but the link is still there.
Go ahead and read that, and I will start on Mr. Mcpherson’s work.
I’ll get back to you once the hurricane passes and I have ah time to read Mr. Mcpherson’s positions.
Hutch did you READ #78 PLEASE THERE IT IS, C’MON MAN THERE IT IS. PLEASE RESPOND THIS
hUTCH; The link did not come up
Yes I did DTG read the article from Mr. ADAMS. There will have to be a debate lol
Msamu,
Listen man. I am so tempted to return insults instead of engaging the discussion as a mature adult. But in order to set a proper example for you I will instead address what you said. Ready?
You typed:
“Hay LD, you’re all in the kool aid but you don’t know the flavor. Hutch said that he would not discuss this topic, my last post was addressing LW7 question,”
(BLD) What in any of my responses brought you to this conclusion? Oh wait, that’s a question. You don’t tend to answer those.
(Msamu) “BLD, you need to stop spinning, You’ve gotten answers from DTG, yet you continue to act as if you haven’t, maybe you guy’s need to consolidate your questions so they can be dealt with in an orderly fashion, not to say I’ve yet to hear an answer to any of the scriptures I presented. It’s like a school yard fight, you guy’s are lined up one behind another to fight one kid, we can do this, but please one at a time ”
(BLD) What exactly am I spinning? myself? the discussion? I haven’t asked you the same questions that I asked DTG. Unless you are talking about his attempts to explain to me what you meant in your answers to J.R. Miller. That he did do. But that’s him speaking for you. I wanted to hear it from you. Do you two agree 100% on everything concerning Full Preterism? Is he your prophet? Does he speak on your behalf? Should I just ask him the questions when I want to know the answer from you? In KJV language, “Shall I inquire of him?” Man those questions just wont stop coming, will they Msamu? And as far as a school yard fight, I let you know that I wasn’t debating, I was asking questions. I asked you to educate me. I wasn’t asking you to obey I Peter 3:15. I was asking for you to obey Romans 15:1-4. And you refused. Also, you didn’t present any questions to me as the setting was supposed to be me as the student and you as the teacher. What questions or scriptures was I supposed to respond to?
(Msamu) “BLD’s got his panties all up is a bunch about my comment, (woops their I go again) so to you and BLD and to anyone that was offended please accept my apologies.”
(BLD) Let’s see, an insult directed at me followed by an apology for insulting another brother. Hmmm? Matthew 15:18-19 “But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, SLANDERS.” This includes what is written, typed, text’d, IM’d, etc. Take note Msamu.
(Msamu) “The short of it this BLD, If Christ said he was going to do something I.E Return and did not according to scripture.
Dut 18:20-22 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, how shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that [is] the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, [but] the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Since God cannot tell a lie, Christ who’s claiming to be God stated that events that would clearly confirm his claim to be The Christ (one lie disqualifies him as Christ) are clearly laid out in old as well as NT scripture, was he specking presumptuously? If yes then he cannot be the Christ, even if he was born of a virgin
did miracles, crucified on a cross, rose from the dead, but did not full all then he lied and cannot be the Christ”
(BLD) Finally an answer! Hip hip hooray! Hip hip hooray! Hip hip, aw never mind. Thank you for answering this question. I would have to say that I agree. If Christ is truly Christ, then those things that He said would come to pass must come to pass. However, there’s this funny thing about prophecy that the Jews didn’t learn. Prophecies must come true in the way God MEANT them and not the in the way we UNDERSTAND them. Just look at Joel 2:28-32. According to the Apostle Peter in Acts 2:17-21, Joel’s prophecy was being fulfilled before their very eyes. But what happened to the “wonders in the sky above”? Was Joel a false prophet? Was Peter delusional? Was it a partial fulfillment? You see Msamu, if we stick strictly to your understanding or interpretation of the application of Deuteronomy 18 as a means to judge prophecies, then we’ve got to reconsider the validity of a lot of things.
Msamu, you don’t have to respond. I have come to the conclusion that you want me to accept answers to questions that I didn’t ask and avoid answering the one’s I did, at least not all of them and not in detail. It seems that you would rather engage in a fight than to actually bear the burden of educating someone concerning what you believe. I apologize, Msamu, for waisting your time. And I apologize to you Lionel for using up so much space for a wasted endeavor.
To Bro. Lawrence D.
It’s clear you don’t understand Jewish allegories, so below is a short lesson
Matthew 24:14, “But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the son of man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory.”
Logically, if such physical events happen it could only mean the imminent destruction of our universe – which is exactly what many believe today! Rather, such poetic language is found elsewhere in the Bible to symbolically describe governing. Celestial bodies were often used to symbolize the rulers (or leaders) of nations.
Genesis 37:9-10, “Now he had still another dream, and related it to his brothers, and said, ‘Lo, I have had still another dream; and behold, the sun and the moon and eleven stars were bowing down to me.’
He related it to his father and to his brothers; and his father rebuked him and said to him, ‘What is this dream that you have had? Shall I and your mother and your brothers actually come to bow ourselves down before you to the ground’?”
Isaiah 13:1-17, “The burden against Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw.. The noise of a multitude in the mountains, like that of many people! A tumultuous noise of the kingdoms of nations gathered together! The Lord of hosts musters the army for battle. Wail, for the day of the Lord is at hand! It will come as destruction from the Almighty. Therefore all hands will be limp, every man’s heart will melt, and they will be afraid. Pangs and sorrows will take hold of them; they will be in pain as a woman in childbirth; they will be amazed at one another; their faces will be like flames. Behold, the day of the LORD comes, cruel, with both wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate; and He will destroy its sinners from it. For the stars of heaven and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be darkened in its going forth, and the moon will not cause its light to shine. I will punish the world for its evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; I will halt the arrogance of the proud, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible. Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them
Obviously there was no literal falling of stars in the days of Isaiah. He pictured the Babylonian Emperor as the sun, the queen as the moon, the military, political, business, and religious leaders as the stars, and the might of the empire as the powers of heaven. If you recall, the Median empire conquered Babylon in 538BC
So when Jesus uses these exact words, with the order slightly changed, he is using Isaiah’s symbolic language to refer to the fall of Jerusalem in the lifetime of His hearers. Jerusalem (Israel) was going to be destroyed in the same way as Babylon was six centuries before.
All would be fulfilled, your argument is not with me it’s with scripture.
Me and DTG agreement 99% of the time, we just disagree on your sincerity that’s the 1% .
That was a joke