Archive for the ‘PretCosmos – Email Exchange’ Category
Of course this position is not exegetical let alone “orthodox,” “creedal,” and thus not
officially “reformed.” But they will want to dress it up as such. How? My guess is that
the one Second Coming happened in AD 70, but it is still being progressively fulfilled (not
the orthodox view by any means) and won’t be completely manifested until Jesus comes back in
his literal body on a literal cloud (Acts 1:11). So much for the one NT coming theory – but I’m guessing
Acts 1 is a description of the consummation fulfillment to the ongoing 2,000+ year parousia
that was begun in AD 70. Acts 1:9-11 is probably their ONLY text in all of Scripture that they will
use to describe this physical phase to the ongoing parousia. Remember what they said in hermeneutics
class about building a doctrine around one text – lol? Mike B. is right – these guys are just “making it up as they go” – lol.
FP do not teach an “ongoing fulfillment” of the parousia in AD 70 with a literal phase (Acts 1:9-11) still awaiting us.
We accept (with the rest of the historical church) that Acts 1:9-11 is the same coming as Revelation 1:7 and the
rest of the NT (Mt. 24-25; 1 Thess. 4-5; 1 Cor. 15; etc…). We do acknowledge that God’s presence is in us – as a result
or benefit of the historically unique parousia whereby the first century church was gathered and caught away into inheriting the Kingdom.
So when one walks through the gates of the City today, it is not the parousia, but rather a benefit or effect that resulted in Christs’
coming/parousia to judge OC Jerusalem and take away the curse of “the death” that came through Adam.
This is not hard to predict in the Talbot/Sam hybrid PP “manifestation” doctrine developed over power lunches between the two
and dangling carrots to return to PP:
1) We are in the New Creation now, but await a physical manifestation of it.
2) Part of the resurrection took place in AD 70, but we await the physical manifestation of it.
3) Christ’s parousia took place in AD 70, but we await the physical manifestation of it (Acts 1:9-11).
In the past Sam tried #1 and was reluctant to renounce his book on the resurrection (and still is – parts of it anyway) in bowing
before the creeds in #2. #3 as well as #2 are crucial to confess – they are the golden calf of hyper-creedalism.
The Talbot/Sam system is driven by a semi-creedal philosophy – not exegesis.