joe pleb @stackharderpleb

Mate you’re not exposing my “presuppositions.” You’re doing the exact thing Paul already called a gangrene. 2 Timothy 2:17-18. Hymenaeus and Philetus said the resurrection already happened. Paul didn’t go “interesting spiritual reading bro.” He said they swerved from the truth and were overthrowing people’s faith. That’s your position. Own it. Christ is the firstfruits (1 Cor 15:20). Firstfruits means the rest of the crop is the same kind of thing. His tomb was empty. He told them to touch the wounds. He ate fish in front of them and said “a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have” (Luke 24:39). Philippians 3:21 says he will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body. If the harvest is just “covenant status changed in AD 70,” then the firstfruits was a lie. 1 Corinthians 15 is not about “the dead ones in Hades getting a vibe.” Paul spends the chapter answering “with what kind of body do they come?” Sown perishable, raised imperishable. Natural body, spiritual body. Still a body. Then he says we shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed. Dead raised, living transformed. That only works if some of us are still in the ground when it happens. Daniel 12:2 sleep in the dust of the earth and awake.
John 5:28-29 all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out.
Romans 8:23 we groan waiting for the redemption of our bodies.
Job: “in my flesh I shall see God.” Luke 20 does not rescue you. The Sadducees denied resurrection period. Jesus proved there is one from the Torah they accepted. “Like the angels” tells you why they don’t marry. It does not delete bodies. You’re the one importing the assumption that resurrection must be non-physical so your system survives. You keep asking how the living get resurrected if it’s fleshly. Paul already answered you. The dead are raised. The living are changed. 1 Thess 4:16-17. Acts 1:11 this same Jesus will come back the same way they watched him go. Visible. Bodily. You don’t have a different hermeneutic from the Sadducees. You have the same result they wanted: no future raising of the dead. You just baptised it in 70 AD language. The text doesn’t let you.

Luke 20:33-38 - absolute death nail for full preterism. Good night. Bless ✝️♥️

@MJack737 Is there evidence for that?

Not sure Full Preterists are aware that 40 years away isn’t what most people mean when they say “soon,” “now,” “near,” or “the last hour.” 😂

@polebarnpuritan @AltChristianMan I was being dumb 😂😂

@polebarnpuritan @AltChristianMan If your definition of spiritually raised applied to Christ then His body (same body made immortal) being raised wouldn’t have meant anything .

@polebarnpuritan @AltChristianMan Yes but He compares it to what happened to Christ. Same body animated by the Spirit. Curse broken. Why would the curse being broken mean anything if the physical was done away with? God created the world and called it good. Death entered the world through sin.

@polebarnpuritan @AltChristianMan You’re responding with the same point you’ve already made and that I responded to and you’re not responding to any of my other points

@polebarnpuritan @AltChristianMan You said individual bodies are not sewn?

@polebarnpuritan @AltChristianMan Psalm 139:13 we are all sewn individually in our mothers womb

Luke 20 isn’t a riddle about Hades souls getting angel wings in AD 70. It’s Jesus telling the Sadducees their whole picture of the age to come is wrong. They assumed resurrection life is just this age on loop: same marriages, same death, same levirate math. Jesus says no. This age: people marry because people die. That age: no death, so no need to produce more people. They are like angels in that they don’t die and don’t marry. They are still “sons of the resurrection.” Bodies. Humans. Not ghosts who floated out of Sheol when the Temple fell….resurrection in Jewish and Christian usage means new bodily life after death, not a completed spiritual relocation. Jesus is firstfruits. Death is still the last enemy. The age to come has broken in; it has not finished the job. If your system needs the general resurrection to already be over and only for the already dead, you didn’t solve Luke 20. You changed the meaning of the word so the verse can’t touch you. “How can living people be resurrected if it’s fleshly?” The same way Jesus was. Tomb empty. Body transformed. The same body being made immortal/imperishable.

Of course context is important - the meanings I pointed to fit with the context. One problem is acting like the only context that counts is the two victory shouts from Hosea 13 and Isaiah 25 at the end of the chapter. Paul is not just talking about Death as a cosmic power that got covenantally defeated, although this is part of it as you rightly point out. But he’s also talking about individual physical corpses. “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” 15:35. The people in view are the ones who have fallen asleep - κοιμηθέντες. Their bodies were sown (σπείρεται) perishable, in dishonor, in weakness, as a σῶμα ψυχικόν. Same thing sown is the thing raised. That’s not metaphor for a covenant shift. That’s dirt and bones. Those -ikos adjectives don’t let you dodge it. They tell you what runs the body, not what it’s made of. Sōma psychikon = ordinary human life that dies and rots. Sōma pneumatikon = Spirit-powered and doesn’t die. Still a σῶμα. Not a body composed of spirit any more than a pneumatikos organon is a machine made of wind. The chapter is soaked in Genesis 1–3. First man of dust (Gen 2:7), death through one man, body returning to the ground it came from (Gen 3:19). Then the last Adam. Psalm 8 and Psalm 110 are sitting right there too: all things under his feet, he must reign until every enemy is under his feet, and the last enemy is death itself (1 Cor 15:25–27). That’s individual bodies still in the ground while the Messiah is already ruling (in the same body he was in on earth but now it’s animated, made imperishable, immortal, by the Spirit) Sarx kai haima “can’t inherit” means this broken, decaying Adam-version, not bodies themselves. Jesus ate fish, said touch me, left an empty tomb. Firstfruits means ours is the same kind of event, later. Hosea and Isaiah give the victory cry once Death itself is swallowed. They don’t rewrite the preceding argument that the body that went into the ground is the body that comes out transformed. Context includes Genesis 1–3, Psalm 8, Psalm 110, and the corpses. Not just the two verses from Hosea and Isaiah.

Anastasis meant dead bodies getting up, not a spiritual upgrade already done. Hymenaeus and Philetu said the event was past while graves were still full and death still running things. Paul treated that as cancer. Sōma pneumatikon isn’t a body made of spirit. Greek -ikos adjectives tell you what runs the thing, not what it’s built from. Present body is sōma psychikon (σῶμα ψυχικόν) ordinary human life, dies and rots. Future one is Spirit-powered and doesn’t die. Still a body. Same thing sown is the thing raised. Jesus ate fish, said touch me, left an empty tomb. Firstfruits means ours is the same kind of event, later. Sarx kai haima “can’t inherit” means this broken, decaying version, not bodies themselves.

Ok I think I see how you read it. But “if it was bodies coming out of graves everyone would’ve just looked at the cemetery” line is pretty smart but that’s not how I interpret it . Hymenaeus and Philetus weren’t saying “look, the graves are empty.” They were saying the resurrection had already happened in some spiritual, already-done sense. That’s why Paul loses it. First-century Jews knew what resurrection meant. It wasn’t “you’ve had a spiritual upgrade.” It was dead people getting their bodies back, transformed. If that’s already past, the hope’s gone. That’s why it wrecked people’s faith. And I’ve also noticed online that a lot of full preterists end up atheists. “spiritual body” doesn’t mean made of spirit. The Greek isn’t talking about what the body’s made of. It’s talking about what runs it. Present body: ordinary human life, dies, rots. Future body: powered by the Spirit, doesn’t die. Still a body. That’s why Jesus eats fish and says touch me, a ghost doesn’t have flesh and bones. Empty tomb. Continuity. Paul says the thing that’s sown perishable is the thing that’s raised imperishable. Not swapped for a floaty spirit. Same with “flesh and blood can’t inherit the kingdom.” Read the next bit. He doesn’t say “so dump the body.” He says this perishable thing has to put on imperishability. This mortal body has to put on immortality. He’s talking about the current broken version of physical life, not physical life itself. So I don’t think the graves being full doesn’t prove resurrection was invisible. It proves it hadn’t happened yet. Jesus first. The rest later. Same sort of event. A spiritually enlivened physical body not goodbye body as we know it. Or Christ as first fruits wouldn’t have bothered with his flesh and bones etc

@AltChristianMan @polebarnpuritan No he said we’d get an immortal body in the type of Christs, unless you think Christ didn’t resurrect in his same body

@AltChristianMan @polebarnpuritan Just sounds like ordinary death dressed up as resurrection, because the hope has been rejigged into a Christian Gnosticism 🤷‍♂️

@AltChristianMan @polebarnpuritan So you do believe we get our resurrected body?

I don’t read Luke 20 as Jesus explaining what happens when you die and go to heaven. Isn’t he putting two ages next to each other? Sons of this age marry and die. Those worthy of that age and the resurrection don’t marry and they can’t die anymore. If that age and the resurrection already showed up in 70, the people in it wouldn’t still be getting married and dropping dead. They are. Nothing changed on that front. Calling it “the dead got raised in 70 and everyone else just walks into it when they die” is just regular death. That’s not the resurrection the Sadducees were asking about and it’s not what Jesus answered. From what age to come looks like it’s pretty clear that we’re still living in the first age He described. This seems like a pretty clear problem for FP.

@polebarnpuritan Find me the best you’ve got because the ‘leaders’ I’ve heard aren’t even slightly convincing

@sola_chad Should be illegal for them to even be ghey