Looking for info: Partial Preterism

[Covenanter]

As for my osas it's a little hard to explain over my phone.

But to take a crack at it.

I suppose I take adoption very seriously so I believe a wandering Christian will be chastened and if necessary called home.

BUT
would you consider a "wandering Christian" to be a genuine Christian if he is living in a sinful situation - adultery or homosexuality, or blasphemy, or joins the JWs?
AND if he does not respond to rebuke/chastening?

Most Gospel churches would consider such a person to be apostate until he repents & ceases to live in sin.

The great danger is what might be called "partial apostasy" in that they respond verbally to the Gospel - the "radio Gospel that majors on the "salvation prayer" - & join the church, continue in the church, enjoying the "entertainment worship" that is so common today but their Christianity ends at the exit door. They can still talk as Christians & claim a "conversion date & experience" but without a living faith.

Such can destroy a Gospel church, even a denomination, as their numbers & influence increase within the church.

Returning to the PP discussion, the Olivet sermon ends with the general injunction for faithful living awaiting the final coming of our Lord without further warning -

Mark 13:31 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.
32 ‘But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 33 Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when that time will come. 34 It’s like a man going away: he leaves his house and puts his servants in charge, each with their assigned task, and tells the one at the door to keep watch.

35 ‘Therefore keep watch because you do not know when the owner of the house will come back – whether in the evening, or at midnight, or when the cock crows, or at dawn. 36 If he comes suddenly, do not let him find you sleeping. 37 What I say to you, I say to everyone: “Watch!”’​

 

[Gorship]

I would lean towards false convert first in the scenario presented

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[Calminian]

Hi All,

So in the process of testing my "IFB" beliefs I have held to for a long time. Eventually I had to question my beliefs in Pre-Trib/Pre-Mill dispensationalism.

I have to admit that Partial-Preterism seems to answer a lot of things that didn't make sense to me.

I suppose my question is;

Is partial-preterism embraced/known among baptist circles? not saying it has to be the most popular but I am curious if there are others who see it as an option.

The question I have is, why do you feel the need to question pretrib premillennialism? Is it a ration need?

In essence it is a rejection of the plain literal reading of the text. Why the need?

 

[Gorship]

The question I have is, why do you feel the need to question pretrib premillennialism? Is it a ration need?

In essence it is a rejection of the plain literal reading of the text. Why the need?

Hi Calminian!

Hope you are doing well.

Just to confirm, are you stating that pretrib premill is a literal reading of matthew 24?

 

[Gorship]

As for the questioning

I think it's important to test all things 1 thess 5:21

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[Calminian]

Hi Calminian!

Hope you are doing well.

Just to confirm, are you stating that pretrib premill is a literal reading of matthew 24?

Literal, in the hermeneutical sense, yes. There are definitely symbols in Scripture that need to interpreted, and are usually interpreted for us. You'll have to tell me which specific parts of Mat. 24 you're questioning, but generally, all Scripture should be approached as literal unless the writer gives specific indications otherwise.

 

[Gorship]

Can we agree that Jesus is talking to the disciples?
And that He tells them that they will see those things listed happen?

The literal sense to me would be that they saw the great tribulation.

Or do you not think this speaks of the same things we read in revelation?

Hope that doesn't read snarky. Just asking.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[Calminian]

Can we agree that Jesus is talking to the disciples?
And that He tells them that they will see those things listed happen?

The literal sense to me would be that they saw the great tribulation.

Or do you not think this speaks of the same things we read in revelation?

Hope that doesn't read snarky. Just asking.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

I'm not sure which verse you're referring to. There's a passage in chapter 16 which speaks of "seeing the son of man coming again.

Matt. 16:28 “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”​

We know John was the longest living apostle, and he vividly saw the return of Christ in the visions God gave him on Patmos.

Rev. 19:11 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war. 12 His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. 14 The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. 15 Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.” He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. 16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:​

KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.​

This is what John literally saw, so this should be taken literally. It also fits with the context, because Jesus limited the seeing in the passage. When this vision is fulfilled, all will see.

If you're speaking of the "this generation" passage in Matt. 24, you merely need to look at the immediate context. Jesus explicitly refers to the generation observing the signs of the tribulation period.

Matt. 24:32 “Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors! 34 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.​

Thus this passages is also literal.

 

[Gorship]

"15“Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16“then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened."

Jesus is still talking to the disciples here about what they will see. This reads to me as them seeing the abomination of desolation, which does not fit in with the pre trib pre mill timeline. I cant find a "gap" that suggests the "you" here is some future people.

 

[asterisktom]

The question I have is, why do you feel the need to question pretrib premillennialism? Is it a ration need?

In essence it is a rejection of the plain literal reading of the text. Why the need?

Let's apply that "plain literal reading of the text" to Matthew 16:27-28:

"For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done.
Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

EDIT:
I posted this the same time. apparently, that you referenced the second verse of this passage. But you overlook that the event here is not only about seeing. John's vision does not fulfill the requirements of this verse.

Neither is it a given that John was the last survivor of the apostles. One or two of the early church fathers wrote otherwise. But I would have to dig the quotes up, and this is secondary.

 

[Calminian]

"15“Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), 16“then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. 18And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. 19But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 20And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 21For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened."

Jesus is still talking to the disciples here about what they will see. This reads to me as them seeing the abomination of desolation, which does not fit in with the pre trib pre mill timeline. I cant find a "gap" that suggests the "you" here is some future people.

Yes, and this was literally seen by John—a worldwide judgment worse than anything since creation, even the Flood! Think about that. Do you really see the destruction of Jerusalem as akin to the Noachian Flood?

Read the judgements of Revelation. They are worldwide in scope, and only a worldwide judgment could fulfill Jesus' prophecy here "....For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. " This tribulation has to supersede the holocaust, Stalin's mass murders and even the Flood which likely killed over a billion people.

Just out of curiosity, do you also reject the literal Genesis account of a global worldwide flood?

What is more, this judgment Christ spoke of is immediately followed by his return.

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.​

Partial Preterism is an impossible compromise according this this verse. Only a futuristic view of the tribulation immediately followed by the return of Christ can be literal.

 

[Gorship]

Lol no I do not reject a literal reading of creation as it literally says evening and morning the first...day

just curious, you keep mentioning John. At a tertiary glance I see the passage says "some of you", some is more than one. Who was with John?

 

[Lodic]

Yes, and this was literally seen by John—a worldwide judgment worse than anything since creation, even the Flood! Think about that. Do you really see the destruction of Jerusalem as akin to the Noachian Flood?

Read the judgements of Revelation. They are worldwide in scope, and only a worldwide judgment could fulfill Jesus' prophecy here "....For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. " This tribulation has to supersede the holocaust, Stalin's mass murders and even the Flood which likely killed over a billion people.

Just out of curiosity, do you also reject the literal Genesis account of a global worldwide flood?

What is more, this judgment Christ spoke of is immediately followed by his return.

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.​

Partial Preterism is impossible compromise according this this verse. Only a futuristic view of the tribulation can be literal.

Actually, Jesus used the word "oikumene", not "kosmos", in the OD. "Oikumene" is the same word used in Luke when Augustus took a census of the Roman Empire, where "kosmos" means "the earth". A literal reading shows that this is a local judgment, not worldwide.

 

[Calminian]

Lol no I do not reject a literal reading of creation as it literally says evening and morning the first...day

just curious, you keep mentioning John. At a tertiary glance I see the passage says "some of you", some is more than one. Who was with John?

Well John also starts Revelation with a blessing for those to hear and believe. If some were still alive when John delivered this epistle others would also have seen through this revelation.

Others could have also been given this vision that was given to John. Visions were extant during that transitional period.

But do you at least admit John saw? If you can't get there, and can't accept the plain account of Matt 24 which says the return of Christ immediately follows the tribulation, it'll be difficult.

I think at very minimum you should admit you're having trouble accepting the literal words of Christ regarding end times.

 

[Calminian]

Actually, Jesus used the word "oikumene", not "kosmos", in the OD. "Oikumene" is the same word used in Luke when Augustus took a census of the Roman Empire, where "kosmos" means "the earth". A literal reading shows that this is a local judgment, not worldwide.

You're wrong.

Matt. 24:21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world (kosmos) until this time, no, nor ever shall be.​

From Mounce: (1) pr. order, regular disposition; ornament, decoration, embellishment, 1 Pet. 3:3; (2) the world, the material universe, Mt. 13:35; the world, the aggregate of sensitive existence, 1 Cor. 4:9; the lower world, the earth, Mk. 16:15; the world, the aggregate of mankind, Mt. 5:14; the world, the public, Jn. 7:4; in NT the present order of things, the secular world, Jn. 18:36; the human race external to the Jewish nation, the heathen world, Rom. 11:12, 15; the world external to the Christian body, 1 Jn. 3:1, 13; the world or material system of the Mosaic covenant, Gal. 4:3; Col. 2:8, 20 ˘ universe; world.

 

[Gorship]

Well John also starts Revelation with a blessing for those to hear and believe. If some were still alive when John delivered this epistle others would also have seen through this revelation.

Others could have also been given this vision that was given to John. Visions were extant during that transitional period.

But do you at least admit John saw? If you can't get there, and can't accept the plain account of Matt 24 which says the return of Christ immediately follows the tribulation, it'll be difficult.

I think at very minimum you should admit you're having trouble accepting the literal words of Christ regarding end times.

Yeah but the verse says you will see the abomination of desolation. Not read about it.

I understand you disagree and all but from my perspective the preterist is being most literal with the text.



Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[Calminian]

Yeah but the verse says you will see the abomination of desolation. Not read about it.

I understand you disagree and all but from my perspective the preterist is being most literal with the text.

Well you definitely reject Jesus statement that he returns immediately after the tribulation.

 

[Gorship]

Lol how? You understand this thread is my trying to understand partial preterism.

Just cause I don't have an answer for something I don't fully understand doesn't mean I don't agree the text says something.





Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[Calminian]

Yeah but the verse says you will see the abomination of desolation. Not read about it.

I understand you disagree and all but from my perspective the preterist is being most literal with the text....

Partial Preterism is actually the one of the least literal of all views, even full Preterism is more literal, albeit heretical.

 

[Gorship]

Partial Preterism is actually the one of the least literal of all views, even full Preterism.

OK well thank you for your input.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk