Pantelism with a twist of lime:
Now the authors are putting some concepts together for us here: The first thing they mention is that the whole passage of 1 Cor. 15 is talking about the dead being raised; that the writer is stating that the resurrection of Christ and of the dead is a simultaneous/ combined event. They also draw our attention to vs. 23 where Paul gives the order in which all will be brought to life: Christ first, then those who were already dead when he came. Vss. 24-26; then is the end. Now of course, many will say “see, he says the end isn’t here yet.” But they’re adamant that’s not what he’s saying; Paul is telling us how it was going to happen: Jesus was going to be here until He put all the enemies under His feet, the last one being death (defeated at the resurrection). Vs. 27; He says the end will be when Jesus put His enemies under His feet, and the last enemy is death. Then Paul said Jesus DID put all things under His feet, which means it’s over. So here, the authors take us back to Rev. 20:13-14, which they state is the same event from a different angle; the dead were released and judged against the law as indicated in John 5:28-29. Here, they include the portion of that scripture referring to the resurrection of life vs. the resurrection of condemnation, but they don’t explain that at all, they just sort of leave it hanging out there.
Here’s their synopsis of what they’ve covered so far: 1 Cor. 15, Jesus has defeated death; shown from a different perspective in Rev. 20. These also demonstrate the judgment of the dead as Jesus spoke of as about to happen in John 5; again the same event described in Rev. 20. This demonstrated that hades itself, (the world of the dead) has been destroyed also in the same fire judgment. Everything here has already happened, just in a way that we didn’t expect.
Now, here’s the definition of pantelism from Wikipedia:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
‘This article is about a distinct form of Preterism that is also universalist in scope. For the more common form, see Preterism.’
“Pantelism is a variant of Christian eschatology that holds that the plan of God has been completed both prophetically and redemptively. The term “pantelism” comes from the Greek παντελής “all accomplished,” and means “all things having been accomplished”. Pantelism has a similar “inclusive” approach to that of Transmillennialism. Pantelism is an extension of Preterism. The difference from preterism is that pantelism views Israel’s prophesied redemption in Christ as the catalyst for mankind’s restoration to God. Some Christians view people being as “born lost,” while others would say merely that each person sins; they must therefore profess personal faith in Jesus Christ to escape judgment when they die. The majority of Christians hold the modern traditional viewpoint about Hell as the final abode of the wicked. Although some preterists accept Hell as a metaphor for judgment[1], and while Full Preterists view the “judgment of the lake of fire” in Revelation as referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in the year AD 70, Pantelists believe both of these things, as well as holding to a specific soteriology: When the Old Covenant system of law and judgment ended (see Abrogation of Old Covenant laws), redemption came to Israel. As a consequence, reconciliation then spread to all humankind. Pantelism understands this inclusive reconciliation, as distinct from Israel’s redemption, as the unilateral act of God and not reliant on a professed personal faith in Jesus Christ. Pantelism further acknowledges that “faith in Christ” was the prerequisite and basis for those called to serve God on behalf of others. Because of the inclusive nature of pantelism and that it accepts the authority of the Bible some view it as a form of Christian universalism, with some referring to it as a “universalist version of full preterism.”[2] There are significant aspects of pantelism also agreeing with universalism’s antithesis “partialism”. For example, pantelism is evangelical in nature – in order to focus people on their hope and on their responsibilities in this life; typical universalism holds that there is no need to spread a specific message (about Jesus) since a loving God condemns no one and all paths of searching lead to life.”
Sound familiar? (Though I’m not sure I agree with the last statement about “typical universalism”) The biggest difference is that these guys steer pretty well clear of any direct discussion of AD 70, and certainly don’t really connect it (at least directly) with the lake of fire judgment (which is an interesting take on the LOF that might go far toward explaining why there was still some ‘wrath’ to be poured out). After all, I have heard some pantelists say that while all has been fulfilled, we are still seeing it being “worked out” in different ways. This might explain the already/ not yet dynamic that we find in Hebrews. Hebrews does in fact say that “all things HAVE been subjected to Christ, but we do not yet SEE that…” reality having unfolded fully, even though it’s clear that as far as God’s concerned, it’s done.
So what about 2 Tim. 2:16-18 and the heresy of Hymenaeus and Philetus? The authors don’t address that issue in the book; they may well not even realize what they’re essentially teaching is more or less pantelism… Well, I found something interesting on this on pantelism.com
"– Is The Resurrection Past? –
Consider this:
2Tim 2:16-18 But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness. And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some.
Paul challenges the false doctrine of Hymenaeus and Philetus that was turning some from the faith “saying the resurrection is already past.” This is the same charge of ‘heresy’ wrongly brought by those who oppose fulfilled prophecy; failing to realise that the ‘Hymenaeus and Philetus’ argument rather than diminishing our approach actually strengthens it, the reasoning is simple:
If the 1st century church expected Christ’s 2nd Coming to be an earth destroying, time ending, history terminating event, as many today think and await, then how was it possible for some to be deceived? All someone had to do was look around and ask “what’s changed!?” – physically nothing! In other words, if the resurrection [which according to Scripture is initiated by Christ’s return] was to be a “physical event” it would be self evident, everything “physically” would be changed – a remade world, people popping up through open graves, and no more physical death. Yet all the living were still present and none had been raptured away. Again, had things been physically reconstituted it would have been self evident. However, there is no record of such things occurring.
Obviously, 1st century believers had a concept and belief about the nature of ‘the resurrection’ that is foreign to much popular present-day Christian teaching. The ‘first-fruit’ believers [Jas 1:18] understood that Jesus’ kingdom did not come with observation [Lk 17:20], in fact His kingdom wasn’t to be of this “fleshly” world [Jn 18:36] - for flesh and blood i.e., “the natural” could not enter it [1Cor 15:50]. His spiritual kingdom entered only through spiritual rebirth - looking not to the “seen” but to the “unseen” 2Cor 4:18. Yet this confusion over the nature of ‘heavenly things’ is nothing new, even the literalistic thinking Nicodemus could not conceive how it was possible to be “born again” except but to enter the womb a second time [Jn 3:9-12].
Paul does not challenge Hymenaeus and Philetus’ concept or belief as to the’nature’ of the 2nd Coming [as they had been Christian], he does however, their ‘timing’ of it. Hymenaeus and Philetus were causing a lot of trouble, and like most of Paul’s opposition they were Judaisers [based on Paul’s constant warnings against “going back” to the Law –Judaism, this is plausible]. Had Hymenaeus and Philetus been correct, then adherence to the “Law” would also have become a requirement of faith, as it was still operative [though it had no redeeming value] while the Temple stood. The writer of Hebrews declares:
Heb 9:8 the Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the Holiest of All was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was still standing.
While the Temple stood the reconciliation was not yet complete; Christ’s Parousia was the manifestation of Christ’s completed redemption.
Christ’s Coming, The Resurrection, The Judgment, and the consummation or fullness of The Kingdom were all concurrent events [2Tim 4:1; Mt 16:27-28], when one happened they all happened. For the resurrection to have occurred whilst vestiges of the Old Covenant still remained i.e., all things typifying the Law – the Temple, the Priesthood, the Sacrifices, the Worship etc… would thus have required their full inclusion in the Gospel, as indeed was the hankering of the Judaisers with regards to a required circumcision etc. However this was never to be the case, for Moses [the Law] was never to enter the Promised Land [New Covenant]. The Law served a purpose but was now in Christ fulfilled. And so this mixing of Law and Grace went completely against all Paul’s teaching on the sufficiency of grace alone apart from the Law, through the faith of Christ [Gal 4:21-31"
This pdf document explains what Hymenaeus and Philetus taught and were accused of heresy for a bit more clearly: fulfilledprophecy.net/pdf/Hy … iletus.pdf
Now maybe, just maybe, the final blow to all of the last vestiges of the old covenant and the temple system were finally made physically evident by the visible destruction of the temple (even though all had been fulfilled already, except for the pieces of prophecy that involved the physical destruction of Jerusalem.)
Ok, back to the book. The next topic is Daniel’s 70 weeks prophecy. While Steve explains that your typical average Christian doesn’t know much about this, he knows that there are a few out there who would certainly not accept that the end has come without explaining an alternative to the “standard” view. So the Essarys jump right in with a look at the text; Dan 9:24-27. Here, we have some cryptic clues as to when the end would come. The prophecy states that it will take ‘70 weeks’ to accomplish 6 things: Finish the transgression, make an end of sins, make reconciliation for iniquity, bring in everlasting righteousness, seal up the vision and prophecy, anoint the Most Holy. They remind us again that most theories put this out there as a future event, and that most CAM leaders will tell you that this event can’t have happened because these six things have not been accomplished yet. The authors hope that by now, you’ll see that they’ve already made a case for the six details, but they run through them quickly again here.
But then there’s that pesky gap theory, so they want to deal with that now. The authors begin by reminding us that the Hebrew word that we translate “weeks”, actually means “sevened”, which is a flexible word in that it can mean 7 days, months or years. Many try to insist that it only means years, but they give the example from Dan. 10:2-3 that gives the lie to this. So the prophecy indicates that the “weeks” are divided into 7, 62, and 1. They admit that the timing of this prophecy is a big mystery, and no one’s really sure about it, but they’re going to offer an interpretation that makes sense to them. They like the theory that the first 69 weeks ends on the day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the colt; which they like because of Luke 19:35-40, the day that was prophesied where if the people didn’t declare him messiah, the rocks would have cried out. The significance of this day was also because this was the last day of the 69th week of years, and the prophecy states that the 69th week ends the day that the messiah comes and this is also the day that Jesus was officially declared the messiah. Now, the gap theory is called that because it suggests that there’s a gap between the 69th and 70th week, and many believe the last week is [i]also a week of years like the others, but the authors suggest that because of the way the weeks are divided, it’s possible that the last week could be any size, including a week of days. Now, they admit that it does seem inconsistent to consider this last week to be a week of days, but they also can’t see how this inconsistency is relevant, and they also point out that it likewise seems inconsistent to say that the last week occurs thousands of years later. They also point out that it seems very strange that no one seems to consider it odd that Gabriel’s prophecy leaves the most climactic event in the entire Bible, (the cross and resurrection) in the gap! This would essentially mean that the cross and resurrection have nothing to do with the fulfilling of this prophecy; leaving most of the CAM saying that the very event that makes Jesus the messiah (the very subject of the prophecy) occurred outside the context of the 70 week prophecy.
continued…
), in the more sober light of morning I think it goes too far. Even the Toht facepalmelt is pushing it. I’m truly sorry guys.
