Preterism and Partial Preterism

[Psalty]

Hey all, not sure what forum to post this in, this one seemed best.

What do you think about Preterism in its many form? I looked at it pretty seriously a while back.

PRO:
“But whenever they persecute you in one city, flee to the next; for truly I say to you, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes.
— Matthew 10:23
Seems to indicate a return in judgement before 70AD

CON: If Revelation is about the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, why does the warning only go to the churches in Asia minor and not to Jerusalem? Makes no sense.

 

[37818]

There is absolutely zero evidence Matthew 24:29 occurred in 70AD.

 

[JesusFan]

Hey all, not sure what forum to post this in, this one seemed best.

What do you think about Preterism in its many form? I looked at it pretty seriously a while back.

PRO:
“But whenever they persecute you in one city, flee to the next; for truly I say to you, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes.
— Matthew 10:23
Seems to indicate a return in judgement before 70AD

CON: If Revelation is about the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, why does the warning only go to the churches in Asia minor and not to Jerusalem? Makes no sense.

Partial view acceptable, full blown one heresy

 

[Psalty]

There is absolutely zero evidence Matthew 24:29 occurred in 70AD.

I agree with you on this, but how do you understand Matthew 10 quoted above?

 

[Psalty]

Partial view acceptable, full blown one heresy

I agree with this as well. I still find viewing the book of Revelation as a book about ad 70 to be untenable since it’s written to the church in Turkey, but the predators will argue. It’s about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

 

[37818]

I agree with you on this, but how do you understand Matthew 10 quoted above?

Matthew 10:23, But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

Will be during verse 21, And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.

Which I think is during Revelation 13:15.


And didn't happen in 70AD.

 

[JesusFan]

I agree with this as well. I still find viewing the book of Revelation as a book about ad 70 to be untenable since it’s written to the church in Turkey, but the predators will argue. It’s about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

There is still much to yet happen

 

[Psalty]

There is still much to yet happen

While I get the analogizing of Revelation and that you can Spiritualize it for general principles, there is way to much specific stuff to think this is 70AD and Jerusalem.

At this point I tend to default to just a Historical Premillenial view like Ireneaus held. Although I can appreciate the Amillenial view, it came late after the apostles in the 300s…

 

[JesusFan]

While I get the analogizing of Revelation and that you can Spiritualize it for general principles, there is way to much specific stuff to think this is 70AD and Jerusalem.

At this point I tend to default to just a Historical Premillenial view like Ireneaus held. Although I can appreciate the Amillenial view, it came late after the apostles in the 300s…

many Reformed Baptist think hold to the historical premil viewpoint

 

[J.D.]

Hey all, not sure what forum to post this in, this one seemed best.

What do you think about Preterism in its many form? I looked at it pretty seriously a while back.

PRO:
“But whenever they persecute you in one city, flee to the next; for truly I say to you, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel until the Son of Man comes.
— Matthew 10:23
Seems to indicate a return in judgement before 70AD

CON: If Revelation is about the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, why does the warning only go to the churches in Asia minor and not to Jerusalem? Makes no sense.

For several years I was satisfied with my Partial Preterism and Post Mil approach to the end times. After the Presbyterians got up a big fuss with one another over something Gary DeMar had said or done, threatening to kick him out their church as such like, I decided that I needed to check out this "Full Preterism" thing and see what it was all the fuss was about and why they were so scared of it. So I ordered a bundle of books from Don Preston*, one of their chief prophets, Thus began a series of theological atomic bombs going off in my brain. So many questions were answered, so many blanks were filled in, it was absolutely amazing. No wonder the creedalists are so afraid of it. Some of their teachings are indesputable.

I say "some". No, I have not raised the FP flag, and I don't know that I ever will, but as RC Sproul said, the witness of this theology must be taken into account, and it cannot be denied that it represents a thoroughly Biblical approach to eschatology.

*I have since come to disagree sharply with Preston on some things in the details, but the brilliance of the man is undeniable. He can quote scripture seemingly infinitely.

 

[Psalty]

For several years I was satisfied with my Partial Preterism and Post Mil approach to the end times. After the Presbyterians got up a big fuss with one another over something Gary DeMar had said or done, threatening to kick him out their church as such like, I decided that I needed to check out this "Full Preterism" thing and see what it was all the fuss was about and why they were so scared of it. So I ordered a bundle of books from Don Preston*, one of their chief prophets, Thus began a series of theological atomic bombs going off in my brain. So many questions were answered, so many blanks were filled in, it was absolutely amazing. No wonder the creedalists are so afraid of it. Some of their teachings are indesputable.

I say "some". No, I have not raised the FP flag, and I don't know that I ever will, but as RC Sproul said, the witness of this theology must be taken into account, and it cannot be denied that it represents a thoroughly Biblical approach to eschatology.

*I have since come to disagree sharply with Preston on some things in the details, but the brilliance of the man is undeniable. He can quote scripture seemingly infinitely.

I think wheree full Preterism falls apart from me is that it has to symbolize the future resurrection. I haven’t heard any full Preterists come up with an alternate explanation that retains a future bodily resurrection. Maybe I’m not educated enough in the nuances of Full Preterism.

I listened to Don Preston debate Steve Gregg who held the partial preterist position. I did not find Don’s arguments for full preterism persuasive against the verses that Steve was using. I believe Steve is coming out with a book arguing against full preterism. Will be interesting to read.

Thanks for sharing!

 

[J.D.]

I think wheree full Preterism falls apart from me is that it has to symbolize the future resurrection. I haven’t heard any full Preterists come up with an alternate explanation that retains a future bodily resurrection. Maybe I’m not educated enough in the nuances of Full Preterism.

I listened to Don Preston debate Steve Gregg who held the partial preterist position. I did not find Don’s arguments for full preterism persuasive against the verses that Steve was using. I believe Steve is coming out with a book arguing against full preterism. Will be interesting to read.

Thanks for sharing!

I think FP's only real weakness is the idea that the natural world goes on forever and is never redeemed, as in the creation is never freed of physical death, predation, etc. I think that's the only hang up I have with it.

 

[Psalty]

I think FP's only real weakness is the idea that the natural world goes on forever and is never redeemed, as in the creation is never freed of physical death, predation, etc. I think that's the only hang up I have with it.

Insightful comment, thanks!