LLC… I’m not sure where or how you’ve read that God “left”? That there was a break or hindrance in man’s “relationship” with God is a given, at least in biblical story of beginnings, and how that was remedied IS the biblical story of redemption and ultimately reconciliation. What was fractured by the first Adam was restored by the last Adam.
Again… human response doesn’t make reconciliation real, rather, human response taps into that pre-existing and established reality.
Noah’s taking God’s warning seriously saved him, his family, and the whole human race.
I believe the worldwide Genesis Flood literally occurred, and produced a geological record showing catastrophe. Massive, worldwide coal, oil, and natural gas deposits are carbon-based byproducts of compressed and decaying organic matter.
It is a known fact that the poles were once warm, even tropical, and that they suddenly became cold, and flooded with water at the same time.
As to the argument that the Flood was a local event, there are sedimentary (water-laid) layers all over the earth, and those sediments contain the buried remains of billions of creatures. The fossilization of living things is evidence that they were buried rapidly, not slowly, since they did not simply decompose.
Layers of sedimentation from the floodwaters have been erroneously labeled as geological ages separated by vast quantities of time. There is a spiritual aspect to this scientific misinterpretation.
Peter acknowledges that the Flood was a literal event:
(However, as you know, I believe Peter was incorrect in not assigning responsibility for this violence to Satan. However I don’t throw out everything Peter says because of this disagreement, any more than I throw out futurism because I now recognize God is nonviolent.)
Peter later associates unbelief about the literal, physical worldwide Flood with unbelief about the literal, physical Second Coming of Christ:
And we observe that in the Olivet Discourse, Jesus links the conditions before the Flood of Noah with the conditions characterizing the earth at the time of the coming [first] Rapture:
There is nothing wrong with eating and drinking, or in marrying and giving in marriage. The point is the people were so carried away with the pleasures of the world that they were indifferent to Noah’s prophetic warnings. God always tries to warn people of Satan’s schemes, and to provide a way of escape.
In distinction to other futurists, I do NOT believe the Rapture is imminent.
Perhaps a fourth of the Bible is prophecy, and I would argue that the bulk of that must yet be fulfilled during a short period of time in the relatively near future, just a “generation” in length (Mt. 24:34).
Regarding the sign of the fig tree, I believe the tree will begin to leaf when the Antichrist comes on the world stage. Prior to the Pre-Trib Rapture, some global crisis will come, and be resolved militarily by the Antichrist; his uprooting three horns signifies defeating three countries:
Again, please allow me to quote Professor Bloomfield, from *Signs Of His Coming: A Study Of The Olivet Discourse *(1962):
In addition to evangelism, and acts of charity, the church needs to be prayerfully reconsidering the prophetic Scriptures.
I would further argue that today we need to be earnestly pursuing the Gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:31), for example, the gift of the discerning of spirits (1 Cor. 12:10).
Blessings.
That Noah’s flood was literal is uncontested… but nothing you said prior to this necessitates a single global flood. All such things were possible by multiple regional deluges. Not only that but the planet is predominately covered with water and ancient geological activities can well explain and so produced the same.
This is where your position forces you to become creative and imaginative in introducing to the text what simply IS NOT THERE, period. That you choose not to believe the Apostle Peter, and Moses’ account (Gen 6:6-7) is fine, but changing the text by saying other than what Peter said is disingenuous at best and dishonest (IMO) at worst.
Jesus had some very stern words about assigning or attributing the work of God to being the work of Satan… Mk 3:22, 28-30 et al; which is pretty much an insult to the Spirit of grace, as per Heb 10:29 and maybe in the ballpark of the likes of Rev 22:18-19. 
Well this is interesting Hermano… WHERE does Peter actually speak of this supposed… “unbelief about the literal, physical worldwide Flood” 
Yep some were indeed mocking the apparent lack of Christ’s parousia AND YET THAT’S the very same thing you’re doing — you likewise scoff, saying it hasn’t happened — hello pot this is kettle!
Davo, I’m clueless 
God is unable to establish a relationship with man? Obviously God can and did establish relationships with men. The Old Testament gives plenty of examples of people who walked with God and obeyed his voice.
There were also men in the Old Testament who walked in faith and had the knowledge and wisdom of God.
Again, there were many servants of God in the days of old.
LLC… none of my quotes you provided above were found wanting by any of your comments that followed. 
Davo, Maybe I’m just not understanding where you are coming from because I don’t think God’s word is progressive. Maybe I’m wrong but, as Genesis 8:22 says "while the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and winter and summer, and day and night shall not cease. There will be times that we rise and times that we fall, when places that were once fertile become wastelands and from wastelands springs of water will flow forth. We know the future in a way because history repeats itself.
That’s a slightly wrong question but given most here come from a futurist background a fair question. I could ask my own wrong or rhetorical question following the same reasoning… if humanity has been forgiven (or at least believers in Christ) why do those who believe still die, or need to die?
But to get to the nub of your question… what was done away i.e., in the AD70 parousia, was the old covenant mode of law existence that had served its purpose and reached its use-by-date. Jesus was Israel’s Prophet and through him God was actually pleading with and giving warning to His people Israel of the impending political and national disaster that was looming on their generational horizon (Mt 24:34).
It wasn’t God’s “will that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (2Pet3:9) MEANING… if Israel would but follow Jesus’ “words of life” they would escape the eschatological melee and mayhem that was coming. Paul was on a similar page…
Those in Israel who refused to listen choosing instead to cling to the ship went down with it… not knowing IN THIS LIFE the forgiveness that was theirs, not realising or grasping the reconciliation wrought through the Cross.
Oops, I picked the weakest translation of the verse (NASB) with which to make my point!
My point being that rejection of the literal, physical WORLDWIDE flood…
…is spiritually linked by Peter to the willful rejection of the literal (and, as per 1 Jn. 4:2-3, * “in the flesh”*) Second Coming of Christ:
It has been argued that the mountains at the time of the worldwide flood of Genesis were not as tall as today—because today’s mountains could have been produced, or heightened, when, during that catastrophe, the crustal plates collided, and the compressional deformation crumpled the rock in the collision zone to produce new mountain ranges, and taller mountains.
But biblically, the various references unambiguously indicate the flood of Noah covered the entire world, and killed every single person and animal that was not inside that ark.
My larger concern is about those who teach against the future, physical return of Christ, because,
Blessings.
My understanding is that ‘under the heavens’ in this context means literally ‘from horizon to horizon’. Their concept of the shape of the Earth was incomplete.
Do I care one way or the other? Not really.
I came across a very interesting article:
A Response to the Preterist Interpretation of the Olivet Discourse(Matthew 24)
Let me just quote a couple of highlights:
Now that I didn’t know 
I have to read this later, and see how solid - the author’s position is. 
Maybe later, I’ll look into this article:
Just a note for Davo. It’s good to see, what the competition is up to. 
Ay, Dave! ¿Que es eso?! Consider similar sedimentation layers around the planet. Consider fossilized plants and animals, around the planet.
Some earlier material indicating the worldwide Flood of Genesis was not from God, but that it did literally occur:
"]
Richard Murray has an essay concerning the Genesis Flood, as it relates to the TRUE nature of God, entitled “Did God Drown All The Children In The World With A Killer Flood? Or Did Satan?”, which is very enlightening. As Murray points out in that essay:
Finally, as to the possible mechanical dynamics of the Flood, you may find of interest the work of Professor Walt Brown. He received a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from MIT, where he was a National Science Foundation Fellow. Please watch this five minute overview of Brown’s Hydroplate Theory, from 1986. (Regarding Satan’s possible role as a master geologist and murderer, especially note what Brown says at the 2 minute point: "Failure in the crust began with a microscopic crack.”)
Blessings.
Hermano - yessir, I have read both sides of this issue. Scientists who differ, etc. I’m agnostic about it.
I get this. However, the old covenant mode of law existence was of their own making, not God’s as it explains in Galatians 4:21-31 and Colossians 2:20-23 “Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why as though living in the world , do you subject yourselves to regulations, Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle, which all concern things which perish with the using, ACCORDING TO THE COMMANDMENTS AND DOCTRINES OF MEN? These indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.”
Maybe many did not know that forgiveness was theirs because they were raised under false beliefs. However, God pleaded with these people many times in the past, through the prophets, to put away such things and return to the faith and the covenant of their fathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,( the foundation upon which Israel was built), and they would be forgiven. But many refused. This is what finally led to their total destruction and annihilation(the lake of fire).
I just don’t see how this has anything to do with the reconciliation of humanity. As I mentioned before, many still preach and follow false doctrines, as they did in the past, even though the fall of Israel is the proof that God’s way of life is the truth. Until one comes to the Jesus way, he/she is not reconciled to God, and destruction still occurs.
qaz… you seem to project an extremely punitive mindset. Your question is loaded in that it assumes postmortem punishment — without thinking, many a prêterist would simply and readily agree, again assuming ‘the lake of fire’ is merely replacing ‘hades’ — Hell MkI being replaced by Hell MkII. Pantelism is more prêteristically consistent viewing ‘the lake of fire’ as a past historical event NOT a future ethereal process, much like the clearing-pond position many a universalist seems to adopt. As I’ve noted before, pantelism understands John’s “lake of fire” and Jesus’ “gehenna” to and one and the same, i.e., prophetic descriptions of the fiery demise of the old covenant world (Mt 24:3).
To say “reconciliation would not save Israel from punishment” is to not understand Israel’s back-story which is full of comparative examples.
All Israel was redeemed (saved) out of bondage (sin) by the grace of God with NO reference to their good works or faith… the WHOLE nation, the good, the bad and the ugly were ALL FULLY redeemed; this was the unilateral work of God. However, only those faithful went on into experience the benefits of said redemption IN THIS LIFE, i.e., the Land of Promise = blessedness and peace.
If you know the story… a whole generation perished, that is, suffered the temporal consequence of their misdeeds YET were FULLY redeemed nonetheless. You’ll notice I used the word “temporal” NOT “temporary” — the consequences suffered were dire BUT relative to THIS LIFE. Thus actions have consequences and especially so for those who were chosen as Yahweh’s representatives to the world — hence the national crisis of AD66-70 that Jesus, Paul and Co. gave warning to. To whom much was given much was expected.
What you seem uncertain about AD70 in this mix. All that was pertinent and key to the old covenant world, i.e., the Law, the Temple, the Priesthood, the Sacrifices, the City, ALL in finality came to naught in the conflagration of those days — this was as I said earlier, none other than Jesus’ “gehenna” and John’s “lake of fire”. Israel the people were redeemed, and yet those who chose to ignore Jesus’ prophetic warnings who clung to that which “is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away” (Heb 8:13) would pay dearly with their lives. Those responding in faith avoided this doom and were subsequently “saved” (Mt 24:13).
Just because a near whole generation perished does NOT mean they weren’t redeemed — they were! Consider these texts from Israel’s past story…
So, with regards to Israel when it came to “remedial justice” under the OC we find the following…
So it was… there were times of punishment involving the outworking of temporal consequences for temporal actions, i.e., their actions had real time consequences in this life where Israel’s temporal pain was the fruit of their trespass; thus their judgment.
These last two verses above show that the TRUE nature, goal and resolve of divine reconciliatory justice is always RESTORATIVE and NOT carte blanche for-the-sake-of-it wrath. God’s “justice” was met fully in Christ at Calvary, met fully in LOVE once for all. That many perished or were carried off into exile was the net effect of rejecting their Prophet/Messiah who DID forewarn these things, giving them opportunity to turn and be saved… as always there was a choice involved. Their demise in no way lessened the reality and efficaciousness of Christ’s bearing of Israel’s sin… He did that for ALL and those that grasped it benefited in this life accordingly.
As an added note, I believe that when Israel was destroyed, it began again in the faith of Abraham. This is what the Trinity refers to, the Father(Abraham), the Son( those of the same faith being spiritual sons) and the Holy Spirit(God), as it says in Romans4:16 “Abraham is the father of all who believe” and as God promised him in the Old Testament, “I shall make your name great.”
Not so! The only ‘spiritual link’ being drawn here is the one you’re fabricating. Peter’s admonishment was that the mockers were NOT taking into account, that is, “they willingly forget” the fact that just like the flood that took many away THAT exact prophetic point was on the verge of occurring in their day with Christ’s parousia!
I might just add… pantelism doesn’t have any official flood position; what I’ve shared are my own thoughts — pantelism is about ‘eschatology’ not ‘archonology’ i.e., last things not first things.
And as for…
There ARE NO “signs” up for spurious interpretation BECAUSE like the Cross “it is finished” — we now live in the blessed results thereof, i.e., reconciliation — that message will always be relevant.
Actually NO, I don’t think you are getting it. The OC encapsulated in the Law was not Israel’s doing but God’s, but by Israel’s hand the law was weakened (Rom 8:3) through disobedience and so its demise ensured; not due to the law AND commandment being bad (Rom 7:12) but that it could never bring righteousness. The TWO covenants symbolised in Sarah/Isaac and Hagar/Ishmael were of GOD, not man… how you can deny this staggers me. One however ultimately wrought death/condemnation (2Cor 3:7, 9) by the nature of it being law, and thus their faithless inability to live up to it; but the other breathed LIFE — that’s the contrast.
I accept your inability to see this, that is plain, but for sake of making it plain to others let me explain. Pantelism answers this way…
Of all peoples, God chose innocuous and insignificant Israel to be His servant priests and the means whereby He would bless the world. Through many sins Israel abrogated her calling and came under severe judgement… from this she needed redeeming — ultimately this occurred through Christ. Israel needed redeeming to fulfil her mission to be the means of divine blessing to the world —** again this was ultimately fulfilled through Jesus and his Body of ‘firstfruit saints’.** With Israel redeemed reconciliation could then flow unhindered to the world beyond… God’s blessing to all. Paul writes of it this way…
Thus did Israel’s redemption reconcile the world — to quote somebody really important… “it is finished!”
“Israel” per sé wasn’t being “punished”. The old covenant which had been the life (though it came to be the spiritual death) of Israel was done… the old covenant Mosaic world of law-righteousness and all that symbolised it, was coming down and coming to naught. The nation had been redeemed at Calvary, and so all vestiges of the old régime had to go — unfortunately anyone ignoring the warnings given paid dearly.
Humanity had sat in the darkness of ignorance as to its Creator (Acts 17:27-28) but through the gospel (Israel’s redemption) the light of grace shone to the point where Gentiles could see their inclusion into this grace — that’s the wider reconciliation that flowed from Israel’s redemption, as per Romans 11 above.
According to Davo’s recommended web site on pantelism, the Cross alone was NOT enough for mankind’s complete redemption:
So, the idea is that the blood of Jesus, provided by being killed by an angry God, PLUS the blood of all the Jews in Jerusalem, killed by an angry Jesus at his Second Coming in 70 AD, were BOTH necessary for mankind’s full redemption.
But please consider the “Christus Victor” theory of the atonement, which proposes that,
So, rather than an offended God killing Jesus at the cross (through Roman soldiers), plus a disrespected Jesus killing all the Jews in Jerusalem (and destroying their law and their temple, through Roman soldiers), in order to redeem mankind; in actuality, the Trinity is nonviolent, and would never kill anyone; rather, Satan killed Jesus, a willing sacrifice, as per Christus Victor.
Further, in harmony with Christus Victor, consider that Jesus, our kinsman-redeemer, has graciously paid the debt price of this land himself. As per the discussion in Jeremiah 32, a kinsman could buy back land lost by the owner to an outside party, by himself paying the purchase price. The sealed book could then be delivered to the original owner, or to the heir. The heir could, at his convenience, break the seals, and, with the open scroll as his authority, take possession of the land—by force, if necessary.
As with all theological debates, the position we choose on any given issue is based on our belief about the true nature of God. I can now honestly say that, “God is good, all the time.” That He is exclusively about abundant life and love. And that love would never kill people, or torture them, or curse them. I encourage you to follow your heart about this “too good to be true” viewpoint, and …let your head catch up later.
Shalom.
Let me share this about “eternal” “punishment”:
"]
~Is hell a never-ending torture chamber, as commonly believed, or limited in time, and for corrective purposes? Recall: *“Love never fails” *(1 Corinthians 13:8). Reconsider Matthew 25:46, regarding the fate of the damned and of the saved. Jesus says,
*"Then they will go away to eternal punishment but the righteous to eternal life.” *
1. But the Greek word translated “eternal” (or “everlasting”) is aionios, and does NOT in fact mean “unending or everlasting in quantity of time.” Rather, aionios speaks to an "indeterminate age set by God alone.” This adjective is used to describe something within time, not outside time (that is, in eternity). Aionios is the adjective form of the Greek word aion, where we get our English word “eon” (age). Young’s Literal Translation for aionios is always “age-during.”
2. And the Greek word translated in this verse as “punishment” is kolasis, a term used to describe the pruning back of trees, to allow fuller and healthier growth. It is also used to describe corrective punishment, “inflicted in the interest of the sufferer.” (For vindictive, vengeful punishment, “inflicted in the interest of him who inflicts it, that he may obtain satisfaction,” the word timoria is used.)
Note: Many erroneously believe that if you deny that the punishment of this verse lasts forever, then you must also deny that the “eternal” life of the saved is unending. But that doesn’t follow, because this verse is dealing with life, or punishment, WITHIN TIME, during the final eon. However, eternity is outside time.
In 1 Cor. 15:20-28, we discover where time will come to its end, and eternity will begin. When the last person has repented in the Lake of Fire, the purpose of the Lake will be finished. It might take a long time, but “Love is patient.” 1 Cor. 13:4.