Partial Preterism: A doctrinal smokescreen for the future harlot system?

Brother Glen,

You've hit on another one of the strengths of the partial-pretrist position, i.e. our position makes the Scripture relevant to the writers and the original readers of Scripture. Futurism makes it all irrelevant and meaningless to the church of the first century.

People throughout history are presupposed to believe that their own generation is the most important one in history. Why? Because I'm in it! I'm important! Surely God wrote all these prophecies for my generation to understand at last.

But actually, that first generation that followed Jesus Christ was tried and tested like no other. They were the crucial building blocks of the church that we all rest our weight upon. We stand on their shoulders. Thank God for their faithfulness!

The gospels and epistles (and yes, even Revelation) were written first and foremost for the benefit of Christians in the early church. They were undergoing a radical change from the Old Testament Jewish world to the New Testament in Jesus' blood. Many had to pay for their new faith with their lives. Christ had left the faith in their hands--they could not afford to fail. They didn't! Today we read the New Testament Scriptures, as it were, looking over their shoulders. Can't we be content with that?

Surely the Church will be tried and purified in our time (and beyond as the Lord wills), but never again will as much be at stake as there was in the first century--when the Christian faith was born, matured, and displaced the Old Covenant symbols with their ultimate spiritual realities.

A believer in the better covenant,

Tim

 

In Louis Berkhof's... Principles of biblical interpretation, teaches that hermeneutics "is properly accomplished only by the readers' transposing themselves into the time and spirit of the author."

Mickelsen's... In Interpreting the Bible notes: "Simply stated, the task of the interpreters of the bible is to find out the meaning of a statement (command, question) for the author and for the first hearers or readers and thereupon to transmit that meaning to modern readers." Removing the setting of the book twenty or more centuries into the future is not conducive to a correct apprehension of its interpretation.

Kenneth Gentry Jr. ThD... In his book "Before Jurusalem Fell"... Makes two other revelant points... Revelation has two fundamental purposes relative to its original hearers. In the first place, it was designed to steel the first century Church against the gathering storm of persecution, which was reaching an unnerving crescendo of therefore unknown proportions and intensity. A new and major feature of that persecution was the enterance of Imperial Rome onto the scene. The first historical persecution of the Church by Imperial Rome was by Nero Caesar from A.D. 64 to A.D.68.

In the second place, it was to brace the Church for a major and fundamental re-orientation in the course of redemptive history, a re-orientation necessitating the destruction of Jerusalem (the center not only of Old Covenant Israel but of Apostolic Christianity[compare Acts 1:8; 2:1; 15:2] and the Temple[compare Matthew 24:1-34 with Revelation 11... Brother Glen

 

Jesus said, "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." (Matthew 24:34) The generation to whom Jesus was speaking did see all those things fulfilled. To wrest this statement to mean the generation who sees these signs thousands of years later is a monstrosity! Jesus told that same generation, "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." (Matthew 16:27, 28) Either Jesus lied or there are some who were standing there with Him who are alive today.

 

The monstrosity is that people prostitute the Scriptures by wrenching the meaning of words into subjectivism.

The partial-preterists pat themselves on the back for being literal about time references and figurative with everything else. Nice work of consistency there.

The premills understand that the time references could have two meanings. The primitives pick the one that fits their preconceived notions. Anyway, we take literally the time references and the descriptions of events.

Remember, Jesus said it was the worst time mankind will EVER know. The destruction of a city and its buildings in one era was hardly worse than the worldwide flood.

Finally, the New Covenant began the moment Christ died when the veil was ripped in half. It did not take God 38 years to do away with the old. He did it in seconds.

Glen, and other preterists, the Jews have not stopped being idolatrous just because a temple isn't there anymore. If you want to talk about history interpreting Scripture, how do you work that one in your system? They are still trying to work under the Old Covenant.

I am glad I don't have to do hermenuetical gymnastics to hold a theological position. People are preterist because they see the church as the savior and that which will bring peace. Not me. I dare not rob Christ of his glory. His kings and priests will reign on the earth just like Revel. 5:10 says.

 

Partial-Preterists spiritualize the Scriptures when there is a precedent. Writing of the destruction of Babylon in 539 B.C., Isaiah wrote, "For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine." (Isaiah 13:10) The Bible uses such prophetic language with regards to the destruction of temporal kingdoms. Premillennialists are the ones who prostitute the word of God by neglecting to let the Bible interpret itself, but instead, providing their own prophetical interpretation. Partial-Preterists, in all reality, interpret the Scriptures more literally than Futurists. Jesus Christ established the New Testament at Calvary. The law and its condemnation against the elect was destroyed at the cross (Colossians 2:14, 15). However, it was not fully manifested until the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. with the full establishment of the kingdom of God (Hebrews 8:13; 9:8; 12:26-28).

[ March 06, 2003, 12:43 AM: Message edited by: Primitive Baptist ]

 

Gavin, what do you expect. If you don't get the doctrine of salvation, how can you expect to be correct about end-times?

Primitive Baptist, the Jews were not a kingdom. Since history interprets Scripture for you and others, they have been ruled by Gentiles ever since the Babylonian captivity.

Also, are you using Old Testament typology in the New Testament? Strange how you pick and choose when you use it and when you don't.

 

Jesus said, "And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." (Luke 21:24) Jesus told His disciples later in the discourse, "So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled." (Luke 21:31, 32) John referred to this in Revelation 11:2, "But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months." Here is so plainly the destruction of Jerusalem that it could hardly be put into plainer words. There is much speculation about the "forty and two months," but it is interesting to note that the Jewish War lasted precisely that length of time.

 

When are you going to stop the criticism and deal with the Scriptures?

 

So how do you see it Gavin and PTW... The arm of the RCC is going to rise gain and persecute the Christians like it was in the days of the Spanish Inquisition ... With the pope and his vatican horde hungry for Christians ... Or maybe better than that Saddam Hussein who is probably the Anti-Christ by some will get the millions of Muslims and those who believe in the Koran to destroy the great devil Satan America by his standards... These make for great movies and probably great for the Sci-Fi Channel but bad bible and prophecy!... Christians just seem to lick there lips when you mention Armageddon... You brethren are welcome to your senarios come what may I've heard them all my life and they do nothing but make fat cat christian authors fatter and christian readers poorer. Authors of delusions of their own mind.

Left behind slaps Jesus Christ in the face and says to the others who are not of the Christian mindset we are going to heaven to bad for you.

Is that your Bible?... Is that your Lord?... Well it is not mine because mine is a God of purpose and love and he knows exactly who his children are and will save everyone of them in spite of themselves.

History proves history and you don't even believe it when it is laid before you Gavin asked what is there left for the church if this is true?... Plenty!!!!!!!!! Just ask myself or Primitive Baptist if we are do nothing Christians... I know I'm not and I'm sure he is not either... Gavin said we need to prepare the church for the end times... Didn't Jesus say that I go to prepare a place for you... That where I am ye may be also... Why do we need to prepare the church for the end times?... Each of our end is going to come sooner or later... What are we preparing for?... I'm prepared to see the Lord whenever he calls me home... That's all I'm preparing for.

I'm going to be daily fighting the fight of faith and trying to follow Jesus in my everyday walk with my fellowman... Then when it comes my time to go I can say I have fought the good fight and now I'm ready to be offered up to a Lord who will say well done my good and faithful servant ... Brother Glen

 

1. IMO, "Left Behind" is mindless foolishness. LaHaye is ignorant and Jenkins is clueless.

2. Only true believers will enter glory. All others will spend forever in hell.

3. Amen.

4. Amen.

5. Well, Glen, then we serve two different Gods. Christ will only save those who have faith in him. No faith in Christ = hell.

Rarely has such a statement been made on this forum. If this idea is the same for all primitives, then they are no different than liberals. They redefine God.

[ March 06, 2003, 08:21 PM: Message edited by: Preach the Word ]

 

Gavin, it seems like you're putting words in our mouths in order to misrepresent our position.

I certainly never said or even insinuated that the modern church has no responsibilities and can just proceed on auto-pilot. I merely acknowledged that the first century church lived in a much more significant time than we do.

Is that so hard to acknowledge?

Preach, I'm still surprised that you so diminish what the Scriptures say about the destruction of Jerusalem, and deny the fading away of Old Covenant--clearly taught in Hebrews.

Glen, what did you mean by the statement that Preach quoted?

In Christ,

Tim

 

Some of the Primitive Baptist brethren tend toward extreme conditionalism, something Elder Sylvester Hassell fought against. I have nothing against Bother Glenn, but his views regarding faith do not represent the Primitive Baptists I know. I am a member of PB-General Discussion Forum along with Elder David Pyles and other sound brethren, and some of the brethren are dealing with that very thing. However, all Primitive Baptists are united in the belief that regeneration is a sovereign work of God (without man) and that faith is evidence of the new birth, not the cause. I know there is a lot of heat in this thread, but I would be willing to discuss any comments/concerns/questions you might have about Primitive Baptists. I know we have our own beliefs, but I would enjoy the fellowship.

In Hope of Eternal life,
Unworthy brother in Christ

 

Tim refresh my memory on what you were ferering to on PTW quote and I will tell you what I meant by it.

I know the temple will never be rebuilt and Christ will reign for a thousand years... If you read your Bible and understand anything about the temple that was destroyed in 70 A.D. The reason that the temple was destroyed is because the temple was replaced by another Temple... For you see gentleman Jesus Christ is the New Temple... The Old Temple was a type and shadow of that to come... Whereby we have access and bring our sacrifices of thanksgiving to the high priest 24/7 and that is why the old temple was destroyed and another will never be rebuilt!... For what reason?... Tell me that Gavin and PTW?... Brother Glen

 

Primitive Baptist first of all I believe just like you do I did not imply what you said I did... PTW knows I believe in spiritual regeneration and I always have for 35 years! Are you telling me that all the elect have to hear the gospel to be saved?... Even though David's daddy Sonny preached a sermon against it?... I'm Old Line Old School PB all the way!... Hope that clears up where I stand... Is that where you stand also?... Brother Glen

 

That is exactly what Romans 10 says.

 

I do not believe that all the elect will hear the preaching of the Gospel. There are practical reasons why I cannot espouse the view that they will. Old Line Primitive Baptists have never preached the universal evangelization of the elect or the universal damnation of the heathen. Elder Sonny Pyles does not believe it, nor does His son, Elder David Pyles. The vast majority of Primitive Baptists are united in this view, however, some tend toward extreme conditionalism (i.e. the elect practicing a habitual immoral lifestyle after being born again). Elder Sonny Pyles does not believe this either. That is heresy. No sound Primitive Baptist believes any such thing.

"...and practically none of them (Primitive Baptists) believe in the universal
evangelization of the elect, but this unbeliever-friendly theology I
sometimes see on this list is truly surprising to me." - Elder David Pyles

Brother Pyles made it clear in the discussion forum that no preacher in our age has preached a populated hell like His father, Brother Sonny. He also makes it known that his father is not an extreme conditionalist which is what I mostly see on the internet. Brother David quotes his father that such doctrines as Christ-rejectors in heaven are from hell. That is the view of the Old Line Primitives. That is what we believe.

 

Why does it matter what those "elders" say? Elder Paul Tarsus said it.

 

Ditto... That is exactly where I stand and I make no bones about it Primitive Baptist!... Ask PTW him and I have been going toe to toe since I've been on here!... Brother Glen