How many of The Church fathers held A partial/Full Pretierist Viewpoint of Theology?

[Martin Marprelate]

All this stuff by Ignatius was what you wanted me to read was it?
I see nothing that says that the Lord Jesus Christ returned to earth in AD70. If this was the climax of all history, why does no one talk about it? I mean, really talk about it? Why isn't it the major preoccupation of every early Christian writer? The Corinthians had been eagerly waiting for it (1Cor 1:7); the Thessalonians were waiting for it (1Thes 1:10); the Philippians were waiting for it (Phil 3:20- did they get that resurrection body in AD70?); the Hebrews were waiting for it (Heb 9:29). Titus was to teach the Cretans to hope for it (Titus 2:13). Why then is everyone after AD 70 not full of it? Why are you restricted to two or three obscure pasages that don't even say what you are claiming?

If this be so, how shall we be able to live
apart from Him? seeing that even the prophets, being
His disciples, were expecting Him as their teacher
through the Spirit. And for this cause He whom they
rightly awaited, when He came, raised them from the
dead (Ignatius: Mag 9:2).

He is referring to the OT prophets and is undoubtedly speaking of our Lord's First Coming and (incorrectly) referencing Matt 28:52-3.

I'm surprised you haven't argued that Paul wrote Titus after AD 70. It would work beautifully for you. 'For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men' (2:11). Perhaps Jerusalem was really destroyed in AD 60?

If you think I'm being sarcastic, you're right. I can't take you seriously. I always try to give proper respect to everyone who contributes to discussion boards, but I make an exception in the case of Hyper-preterism.

Steve

 

[asterisktom]

If you think I'm being sarcastic, you're right. I can't take you seriously. I always try to give proper respect to everyone who contributes to discussion boards, but I make an exception in the case of Hyper-preterism.
Steve

Your friend thinks higher of you than you merit. But rest assured, your sarcasm and flippancy earn from me the disrespect you richly deserve. No need even for writing, unless you want to vent. I will no longer even see anything that comes from you.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Ignatius, To the Tallians IX.
'Turn a deaf ear to any speaker who avoids mention of Jesus Christ who was of David's line, born of Mary, who was truly born, ate and drank; was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, truly crucified and died while those in heaven, on earth, and under the earth beheld it; who was also truly raised from the dead, the Father having raised Him, who in like manner will raise us also who believe in Him- His father, I say, will raise us in Christ Jesus, apart from whom we have not true life.'

Unless I am much mistaken, Ignatius was looking forward to a future resurrection. :thumbs:

Steve

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Bump.
Any Preterists want to deal with the Ignatius quote above?

Steve

 

[asterisktom]

Ignatius, To the Tallians IX.
'Turn a deaf ear to any speaker who avoids mention of Jesus Christ who was of David's line, born of Mary, who was truly born, ate and drank; was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, truly crucified and died while those in heaven, on earth, and under the earth beheld it; who was also truly raised from the dead, the Father having raised Him, who in like manner will raise us also who believe in Him- His father, I say, will raise us in Christ Jesus, apart from whom we have not true life.'

Unless I am much mistaken, Ignatius was looking forward to a future resurrection. :thumbs:

Steve

I am not sure what it is you think you found, but it is unrelated to what I actually said. I am not denying future resurrections from the time AD 70 - All Christians here today, after ll, didn't even exist then. From the post AD 70 standpoint, when a person believes in Christ they are resurrected.

The point brought up originally in this thread was the fact that Ignatius was witness to, and wrote of, the PAROUSIA.

Do a search in this thread, in all five pages, for Parousia and you will see the several times I kept coming back to that.

That was the point that was contested earlier. And that was what I was proving from Ignatius's writings.

 

[asterisktom]

Bump.
Any Preterists want to deal with the Ignatius quote above?

Steve

See post above.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I wrote, quoting from Ignatius to the Trallians:-

'Turn a deaf ear to any speaker who avoids mention of Jesus Christ who was of David's line, born of Mary, who was truly born, ate and drank; was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, truly crucified and died while those in heaven, on earth, and under the earth beheld it; who was also truly raised from the dead, the Father having raised Him, who in like manner will raise us also who believe in Him- His father, I say, will raise us in Christ Jesus, apart from whom we have not true life.'
Unless I am much mistaken, Ignatius was looking forward to a future resurrection.

To which Asterisktom relied:-

I am not sure what it is you think you found, but it is unrelated to what I actually said. I am not denying future resurrections from the time AD 70 - All Christians here today, after ll, didn't even exist then. From the post AD 70 standpoint, when a person believes in Christ they are resurrected.

Wonderful! You have judt collapsed your own house of cards. Ignatius is writing to a church- to people whom he believed already to be Christians, as evidenced by his introduction.
'Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the holy Church which is at Tralles, in Asia, beloved of God, the Father of Jesus Christ, elect, and worthy of God....'

Ignatius is writing of a future resurrection of those who are already Christians. '....Who in like manner will raise us also who believe in Him- His Father, I say, will raise us in Christ Jesus.' Your whole argument is busted.

The point brought up originally in this thread was the fact that Ignatius was witness to, and wrote of, the PAROUSIA.

I'm sure it was, and your work was as faulty there as it is everywhere else. Now deal with the plain meaning of what Ignatius wrote to the Trallians.

Steve

 

[asterisktom]

I wrote, quoting from Ignatius to the Trallians:-


To which Asterisktom relied:-

Wonderful! You have judt collapsed your own house of cards. Ignatius is writing to a church- to people whom he believed already to be Christians, as evidenced by his introduction.
'Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the holy Church which is at Tralles, in Asia, beloved of God, the Father of Jesus Christ, elect, and worthy of God....'

Ignatius is writing of a future resurrection of those who are already Christians. '....Who in like manner will raise us also who believe in Him- His Father, I say, will raise us in Christ Jesus.' Your whole argument is busted.



I'm sure it was, and your work was as faulty there as it is everywhere else. Now deal with the plain meaning of what Ignatius wrote to the Trallians.

Steve

Talk about faulty. Where to begin?

First of all, in that passage from Ign. read the very next paragraph and you will see in what vein he is writing. A person who writes as a teacher speaks in a certain that is more inclusive. Consider James 3:1

"My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment."

Now did James the Apostle "receive a stricter judgment"? I don't think so. He was teaching inclusively, for didactic purposes. Same here with Ignatius.

However even if you did find a quote that shows Ignatius's belief in a coming general judgment and resurrection - and I don't think you can - it would only show his unclearness on this subject. Such things do happen over a lifetime. Even in a much shorter period John the Baptist went from "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!" to "Are you the One to come...or do we look for another?"

But my main point stands, and that is that Ignatius did speak of the Parousia in the passages I showed you. On those you made no substantial comment, other than label it "faulty".

I'm done speaking of Ignatius and other extrabiblical sources for now. You were the one who said I dwellt on this - and then you write more on it yourself and tell me "Now deal with it".

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Your last post is nonsense and I think you know it. However, I'm happy to leave it to anyone who is still reading this stuff to decide. You are correct that enough time has been spent on it.

I dealt with your 'Parousia' in #41.

Steve

 

[asterisktom]

Your last post is nonsense and I think you know it. However, I'm happy to leave it to anyone who is still reading this stuff to decide. You are correct that enough time has been spent on it.

I dealt with your 'Parousia' in #41.

Steve

The grace of God not only teaches Christ, but Christlikeness.

In the course of these last few days I have been disabused by you several times, strongly implied I was a cultist and heretic, of course implied also that I am not saved (and isn't there a rule about that here on BB?). So your "nonsense" here is only icing on the cake.

Everyone who follows this discussion can also see, not only the issues being discussed, but the way they have been discussed. I know, looking at your responses, that I can't always be sure that I won't write something I might regret so I will just block your comments. Best for all involved.