Preterism

2 Peter 3:8-18 will give 'em an opportunity to twist an' dodge, methinks.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

I think Hank Hannegraff is a preterist is he not?

If he isn't doesn't he lean that way?

Or is he writing a book about it. I heard something from him or about him just lately concerning preterism. Anybody know?

 

I know I am going to regret this, since I am brain washed and all, spreading my doctrine of the devil...

But, I am at least a partial preterist and still believe in preaching the Word and showing the love of God to the lost. I don't do this because of some second coming or any other reason than I have been commanded by God and his Word to do so. That is the only motivation any true Christian should need.

Now, swipe away.

I will not argue with you.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Also,

I wonder who you think has brainwashed me into the doctrines of preterism since I grew up in a pre-mil church, pre-mil family, watching pre-mil movies (Theif in the Night), reading pre-mil books (Hal Lindsey), hearing pre-mil sermons. I had never even heard of Preterism until about 10 years ago, and I have read two books about the topic of preterism (Beyond the End Times- pro-preterism- by John Noe and Revelation: Four Views - a neutral commentary about Revelation which presents all four major views - by Steve Gregg). I have also spent time studying the Bible and praying about this doctrinal issue. Now, if a lifetime of pre-mil teaching, sermons, books, raising, and movies could not stand up under the scrutiny of two books, prayer, and Bible Study, I guess I am at a loss as to how you think I am brainwashed. Perhaps the pre-mil doctrine is just that Biblically weak. Is it possible?

My point is, if I have brainwashed by anything, it has been the pre-mill point of view in my life. One pro-preterist book, one Neutral book, prayer, and Bible Study, does not brainwashing make. Sorry.

Joseph Botwinick

[ June 10, 2005, 06:43 PM: Message edited by: Joseph_Botwinick ]

 

I think full preterism is difficult to justify biblically. Partial preterism, however, is quite attractive to me.

I'm probably closest to a partial preterist than anything else. I consider myself a partial preterist, premillennial, non-dispensational fellow.

I like my eschatology buffet-style, I guess!

 

About the gospel being preached around the world...well, first, give me a quote, then tell me how this MUST refer to every single person or people group on the earth.

Times of the Gentiles.....ok, how would anyone know that anyhow?

Christ not ruling the nations....well, assuming a literal interpretation, no, but is God in charge of the world? Yes.

Peace on earth? Well, I'm with you on this one, but one can make an argument against literal peace for the entire world.

Anti-christ? Ok, give me one quote from the Bible which uses the word "anti-christ." Make sure this quote shows why his coming must be future.

Rapture? Can't prove it.

Signs of the times? What signs haven't been fulfilled??

 

I think that the vast increase in knowledge as foretold by Daniel, the explosive growth in the population of the earth, the new found powers over the atom that make it possible to conceive of men themselves contributing to the destruction of the earth by fire, and the gospel being heard around the world by short wave radio, internet, etc and the reforming of the nation of Israel are all "signs of the times".

 

I think that is a bit too strong. While it is true that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and things taught by demons; I feel very strongly that this refers to essentials, and one's view of eschatology, or Calvinism, is not an essential.

Teaching that the Lord Jesus was Michael the archangel, or that God was once a man, or you are saved because you were sprinkled as a baby, things like that speak of essentials. The devil, demons, seducing spirits, etal, don't give a hoot about what anyone thinks of the future. What they are concerned about is two things:
1.) Keeping people from a saving knowledge of grace through faith in the Lord Jesus.
2.) If you are saved, to ruin your testimony any way they can so that you do not spread the truth.

 

There is not a one of us who will have the details of the second coming of Christ Jesus correct in our eschatological. We will simply be incorrect to varying degrees. I think that full preterists and dispensationalists will turn out to be more incorrect than other viewpoints.

 

A simple check of history compared to Scripture will end the Preterist myth, or at least it SHOULD.

Here are the main Hyper-preterist views, along with my commentary:

1. Nero was the Antichrist. There will be no future individual Antichrist.

As I said, a basic knowledge of Scripture and history shows this to be incorrect.Nero(Claudius Caeasr) was doubtlessly a mental case, pervert, and a very evil man. However, he did NOT fulfill any prophecy. He was chased from power by his own Praetorian Guard, and not for losing a battle; his administration of the civil govt. had totally ceased. He died by stabbing himself as he was about to be arrested. He was NOT thrown alive into gehenna as Scripture says the REAL antichrist will be. And Napoleon made Nero look like a naughty 2-yr-old, while Hitler & Stalin each made Napoleon look like a naughty toddler. Each of them died & were NOT cast alive into gehenna. The REAL DEAL will make those still alive forget all those named above.

2. The Tribulation Period is already over. It occurred when the Roman army besieged Jerusalem in AD 66-70.

The siege of Jerusalem did NOT last 3 1/2 years, and was NOT a danger to "all flesh". And the 70 AD destruction was a small event next to the Diaspora of 136 AD ordered by Hadrian. By that time, Jerusalem had been largely rebuilt.

3. Christ “returned” in the clouds in AD 70 to witness the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman army.

Heresy. Such an idea is found NOWHERE IN SCRIPTURE.

Jesus PLAINLY said, "Every eye" would see His return...there'd be no mistaking it for anything else.
He also said that when 2 or3 would gather in His name, He would be among them. Do I believe that? ABSOLUTELY! But has he returned visibly, fully physically, in the manner He Himself described? Newp!

4. God replaced Old Testament Israel with the Church. Therefore, all the biblical promises to Israel belong to the Church.

More heresy. Given the LITERAL meaning of the other Scriptures, how can anyone who's ever read a Bible completely say such hooey? many times God says he will restore both Judah & Israel, Judah first, not because they DESERVE it, but to SHOW HIS POWER to the rest of the world; He promised to restore them, and He wants to show the world that HIS WORD STANDS.

Does anyone believe that in 50 years Judah(modern Israel) has grown from a collection of villages, kibbutzim(collective farms) & refugee camps of downtrodden people into a wealthy nation that's the "pound-for-pound" MILITARY CHAMPION OF ALL TIME on it's OWN? Is GOD at work here, or not? He didn't make Israel mighty because they deserve it; remember, most of'em still reject the Messiah.

No, this is the beginning of a a literal fulfillment of His prophecy for LITERAL Israel, Judah first.

5. Armageddon already happened in AD 70. The fall of “Babylon” refers to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans.

Jerusalem was NOT "thrown into the sea", the world didn't mourn for her, and a close reading of Revelation 16 shows this city as ROME. Jerusalem has NEVER reigned over the kings of the earth although it has become a "burdensome stone" to them. It's called "Sodom and Egypt" but not "Babylon".

6. Satan is already bound in the abyss and cannot hinder the spread of the Gospel. Revelation 20 has already been fulfilled.

Looks as if Satan is quite loose right now, what with the circulation of false doctrines such as preterism, the activities of the ACLU, and the other obvious apostasies now abounding. While this is by no means the most apostate era there has ever been,(Contrary to the belief of those who hold the false "seven church ages" doctrine) there's plenty enuff for the lost to choose from, let alone the garbage that's fooled even some Christians, such as Hyper-Calvinism and the KJVO myth. satan just LOVES it when someone says he doesn't exist, or that he's powerless.

7. We are already in the Millennium, but it is not literal. Some preterists equate the entire Church Age as the Millennium. The 1,000 years are not literal but figurative, even though they are mentioned six times in Revelation 19-20.

That's funny, how some well-meaning take certain Scriptures literally, but not others. I have eleven different English Bible versions, & every one of'em says "thousand years". Far as I'm concerned, the only other explanation possible besides a literal thousand years, is the "year for a day" principle, which would make the literal time period over 365 K years. This is highly unlikely. therefore, I'll stick with the literal thousand years.

Preterism is just another of those false, man-made myths not supported by either Scripture or history.

 

robycop3:

 

You are referring to full preterism, not partial preterism. Simply stating "preterism" does not fully disclose which one you are referring to nowadays.

Both full preterism and dispensationalism are the two extreme eschatological views on either end of the spectrum.

 

robycop3

 

For me personally, I just can't see how you can read through the Bible and take what you read literally and come up with a preterist view. I'am not qualified enough to debate it on a scholarly level. I just know to me personally you have to symbolize a whole, whole lot of Sripture to make the preterist view work.

 

For full preterism that is true.

Partial preterism is definitely the best way to go in the realm of eschatology.

 

What exactly does your view of partial preterism encompass? I think any system that takes away from the literal interpretation of prophecy needs to be considered carefully. There may be partial fulfillments of prophecies and spiritual applications to be made, but that is no reason to deny the full literal fulfillment of prophecies. The prophecies of Jesus in the old testament were fulfilled to the letter. Why would God not do the same with the prophecies of the new testament?

 

Obviously, the second coming has not taken place since when Christ Jesus comes again and we see Him this present earth will be replaced by the new heavens and earth.

One must be very careful when intrepreting symbolic literature in the Bible, especially the book of Revelation. This the largest failing of both of the extreme eschatologies - full preterism and dispensationalism.

 

Symbolic literature?