Preterism - True Or false?

[Hermeneut7]

Sir, you're trying to use the preterists' fave smokescreen - reducing "inconvenient" Scriptures to "figurative/symbolic" status. well, it WON'T WORK!

Was Jerusalem figuratively, or literally, destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD?

Is there one stone of the temple of Jesus' time left upon another?

Is there war and rumor of war? Or, are all those things symbolic?

Again & again, I shall ask preterists for **PROOF** their pronouncements are true. So far, they're batting .000.

It's the preterists who go beyond the things that are written. Jesus said the great trib will be the worst disaster in history & it'll be worldwide, but prets try to limit it to the siege of Jerusalem while the rest of the world went on unaffected. And prets cannot show us when all life in the seas died, when all green grass was burned up, or when there was a rain of rocks.

And they cannot show us when Jesus returned in great power and glory, as He said He will, SEEN BY ALL, also as He Himself said.

Preterism remains a false doctrine, phony as a Ford Corvette.

I see so many men have answered you so well, I'll not continue. I guess I'm a 'Johnny come lately' here. I will say, and I don't mean this in a nasty way. I've spent time debating a couple of WatchTower men lately. Sadly, I find most Dispensationalists argue in the same manner as the JWs. Maybe it is just common among the heresies and cults that popped up in the 19th century.

 

[Covenanter]

Well, there were the curses of Lev 26 & Dt 28 which followed the Jews for centuries. But for the most part they've been 'loosed' from those beginning early 19th century:

Emancipation

I tend to the view that God's dealings with Israel as a nation ended with the destruction. They were declared "uncircumcised" by Stephen speaking in the power of the Holy Spirit, & the Gospel was soon after opened to uncircumcised Gentiles, both events at the conclusion of the 70 weeks.

According to Paul the wrath of God on them was to the uttermost. 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 Whatever those calling themselves Jews, & maintaining a form of the religion did after that was of no concern to God, apart from welcoming them by the Gospel on an individual basis.

Persecution of Jews by the churches is utterly abhorrent & totally contrary to the Gospel, as is the genocide being practised by the nation calling itself 'Israel' against the Palestinians.

Family records were destroyed in the destruction & there are serious doubts about whether the Ashkenazi Jews of Northern Europe are Semitic, descendants of Abraham. Genesis 10:2-3

 

[kyredneck]

I tend to the view that God's dealings with Israel as a nation ended with the destruction. They were declared "uncircumcised" by Stephen speaking in the power of the Holy Spirit, & the Gospel was soon after opened to uncircumcised Gentiles, both events at the conclusion of the 70 weeks.

According to Paul the wrath of God on them was to the uttermost. 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 Whatever those calling themselves Jews, & maintaining a form of the religion did after that was of no concern to God, apart from welcoming them by the Gospel on an individual basis.

Persecution of Jews by the churches is utterly abhorrent & totally contrary to the Gospel, as is the genocide being practised by the nation calling itself 'Israel' against the Palestinians.

Family records were destroyed in the destruction & there are serious doubts about whether the Ashkenazi Jews of Northern Europe are Semitic, descendants of Abraham. Genesis 10:2-3

I haven't put much thought into this but I understand where you're coming from. But compare these passages with the Jewish Virtual Library article of their emancipation I linked:

64 And Jehovah will scatter thee among all peoples, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou nor thy fathers, even wood and stone.
65 And among these nations shalt thou find no ease, and there shall be no rest for the sole of thy foot: but Jehovah will give thee there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and pining of soul; Dt 28

For some reason the Jews consider themselves as having been emancipated from a very long period of bondage. Why is that?

 

[HankD]

Sir, you're trying to use the preterists' fave smokescreen - reducing "inconvenient" Scriptures to "figurative/symbolic" status. well, it WON'T WORK!

Was Jerusalem figuratively, or literally, destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD?

Is there one stone of the temple of Jesus' time left upon another?

Is there war and rumor of war? Or, are all those things symbolic?

Again & again, I shall ask preterists for **PROOF** their pronouncements are true. So far, they're batting .000.

It's the preterists who go beyond the things that are written. Jesus said the great trib will be the worst disaster in history & it'll be worldwide, but prets try to limit it to the siege of Jerusalem while the rest of the world went on unaffected. And prets cannot show us when all life in the seas died, when all green grass was burned up, or when there was a rain of rocks.

And they cannot show us when Jesus returned in great power and glory, as He said He will, SEEN BY ALL, also as He Himself said.

Preterism remains a false doctrine, phony as a Ford Corvette.

I've got your back RC3 - glad you call their doctrine "phony" not the people themselves.

Acts 1:11 who also said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven."

Revelation 1:7 Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.

HankD

 

[HankD]

I tend to the view that God's dealings with Israel as a nation ended with the destruction. They were declared "uncircumcised" by Stephen speaking in the power of the Holy Spirit, & the Gospel was soon after opened to uncircumcised Gentiles, both events at the conclusion of the 70 weeks.

According to Paul the wrath of God on them was to the uttermost. 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 Whatever those calling themselves Jews, & maintaining a form of the religion did after that was of no concern to God, apart from welcoming them by the Gospel on an individual basis.

Persecution of Jews by the churches is utterly abhorrent & totally contrary to the Gospel, as is the genocide being practised by the nation calling itself 'Israel' against the Palestinians.

Family records were destroyed in the destruction & there are serious doubts about whether the Ashkenazi Jews of Northern Europe are Semitic, descendants of Abraham. Genesis 10:2-3

I have researched this as well. I am of Jewish descent on my mother's side. Her mother (my grandmother) was Jewish and immigration records show she was from the area of Prussia (and married my maternal Italian grandfather here in America) which would probably make me of Ashkenazim descent on my mother's side. The rest of me is of Italian extraction Oy vey/Mama mia .

DNA results cannot distinguish Ashkenazim from Sephardim (or so I have read).

But what difference does it make spiritually for those who have been BORN AGAIN and thereby citizens by birthright of the New Jerusalem?

Nothing.

HankD

 

[Yeshua1]

The prets cannot & will not try to answer.

The second coming is the blessed hope of the Christian and the Church, so what do we have if already happened?

 

[Yeshua1]

I think you need to read up on partial preterism. Respectfully speaking, I do not believe you understand it.

Partial version of it is allowed to be held, but it is really not to be seen as being a preferred viewpoint, but full blown version of it is heresy!

 

[HankD]

I think you need to read up on partial preterism. Respectfully speaking, I do not believe you understand it.

We hear this so often. Granted - please address the point of misunderstanding.

My presumption is that partial preterists believe Jesus will come at the end of everything and usher us into the eternal state (or so I have read in my research and questioning partial preterists).

To just make this statement accusing someone of misunderstanding seems to me to be a ploy.

Prove me wrong and explain one point of misunderstanding made by robycop3.

That way we can address it with some understanding of which you have contributed.

HankD

 

[Covenanter]

I have researched this as well. I am of Jewish descent on my mother's side. Her mother (my grandmother) was Jewish and immigration records show she was from the area of Prussia (and married my maternal Italian grandfather here in America) which would probably make me of Ashkenazim descent on my mother's side. The rest of me is of Italian extraction Oy vey/Mama mia .

DNA results cannot distinguish Ashkenazim from Sephardim (or so I have read).

But what difference does it make spiritually for those who have been BORN AGAIN and thereby citizens by birthright of the New Jerusalem?

Nothing.

HankD

I agree with you - the idea that God has in effect been punishing the Jews for the last 2,000 years - 60 generations, until Jesus returns, is utterly repugnant. Likewise church persecution of Jews.

We tend to forget that many thousands of Jews responding to the Gospel during the Acts period, and these Jews formed the Church. Within a generation of so the unity of Jew & Gentile in Christ would have resulted in intermarriage, & no continuation of "Messianic Jews."

 

[HankD]

Partial version of it is allowed to be held, but it is really not to be seen as being a preferred viewpoint, but full blown version of it is heresy!

OK Y. Why do you label full preterism as heresy?

While they do not endorse the visible, bodily return of Jesus Christ they do believe in His second coming as happening AD70.

Apart from the doctrinal issues we have as futurists why is their belief "heresy"?

Just curious.

HankD

 

[Yeshua1]

I tend to the view that God's dealings with Israel as a nation ended with the destruction. They were declared "uncircumcised" by Stephen speaking in the power of the Holy Spirit, & the Gospel was soon after opened to uncircumcised Gentiles, both events at the conclusion of the 70 weeks.

According to Paul the wrath of God on them was to the uttermost. 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 Whatever those calling themselves Jews, & maintaining a form of the religion did after that was of no concern to God, apart from welcoming them by the Gospel on an individual basis.

Persecution of Jews by the churches is utterly abhorrent & totally contrary to the Gospel, as is the genocide being practised by the nation calling itself 'Israel' against the Palestinians.

Family records were destroyed in the destruction & there are serious doubts about whether the Ashkenazi Jews of Northern Europe are Semitic, descendants of Abraham. Genesis 10:2-3

So when peter and paul both stated that God will deal again with israel once the time of the Gentiles id fulfilled, they were mistaken? As both held that when israel was restored back to God, how much greater than when gentiles were grafted in, as the jews are the natural vines?

What is the Day of the Lord and Time of Jacobs folly for israel than?

 

[Yeshua1]

OK Y. Why do you label full preterism as heresy?

While they do not endorse the visible, bodily return of Jesus Christ they do believe in His second coming as happening AD70.

Apart from the doctrinal issues we have as futurists why is their belief "heresy"?

Just curious.

HankD

They deny the physical resurrection of the saints, and deny a literal second coming, as they see it as a spiritual coming, almost like JW do!

 

[HankD]

I agree with you - the idea that God has in effect been punishing the Jews for the last 2,000 years - 60 generations, until Jesus returns, is utterly repugnant. Likewise church persecution of Jews.

And I agree with you but most of us are reluctant to make that claim for fear of being antisemitic.

The wrath of God is by no means exclusive to Jews but EVERY human being who believes not on Jesus Christ.

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Those who have persecuted and murdered Jews (or any sector of humanity) have proven by their deeds that they themselves believe not but are of their father the devil.

HankD

 

[HankD]

They deny the physical resurrection of the saints, and deny a literal second coming, as they see it as a spiritual coming, almost like JW do!

Yes, they do deny a physical resurrection of our own bodies as Tom Asterisk had explained to me years ago.

But MANY, even in the regular denominations, hold that the resurrection of the body is the obtaining of a spiritual body not a literal body which will come up out of their earthen graves. As a former Catholic this was also what I was led to believe.

Also many in the regular denominations as well as Catholicism know not of the literal, bodily return of Jesus Christ.

HankD

 

[kyredneck]

the idea that God has in effect been punishing the Jews for the last 2,000 years

For some reason the Jews consider themselves as having been emancipated from a very long period of bondage. Why is that?

-bump-

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes, they do deny a physical resurrection of our own bodies as Tom Asterisk had explained to me years ago.

But MANY, even in the regular denominations, hold that the resurrection of the body is the obtaining of a spiritual body not a literal body which will come up out of their earthen graves. As a former Catholic this was also what I was led to believe.

Also many in the regular denominations as well as Catholicism know not of the literal, bodily return of Jesus Christ.

HankD

To deny that there was a literal and physical second coming, and to deny the physical resurrection is heresy.

 

[HankD]

To deny that there was a literal and physical second coming, and to deny the physical resurrection is heresy.

I prefer to say that they are mistaken.

HankD

 

[robycop3]

Let's start with Zechariah 9 -
We all rejoice in the perfect, literal fulfilment in Zechariah 9:9
Read on to see the context, & the results of that glorious entry into Jerusalem, then explain LITERALLY, EXACTLY AS WRITTEN.

Fron V9 onward, the fulfillment is yet future, as is obvious. Who's to say it won't be literal?

 

[HankD]

Fron V9 onward, the fulfillment is yet future, as is obvious. Who's to say it won't be literal?

How about Zechariah 14!?

Verses 3 & 4 clearly show His visible and bodily return to the Mount of Olives from whence He left and angels promised His return:

Zechariah 14:1 Behold, the day of the LORD is coming, And your spoil will be divided in your midst.
2 For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem; The city shall be taken, The houses rifled, And the women ravished. Half of the city shall go into captivity, But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
3 Then the LORD will go forth And fight against those nations, As He fights in the day of battle.
4 And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, Which faces Jerusalem on the east. And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two, From east to west, Making a very large valley; Half of the mountain shall move toward the north And half of it toward the south.
5 Then you shall flee through My mountain valley, For the mountain valley shall reach to Azal. Yes, you shall flee As you fled from the earthquake In the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Thus the LORD my God will come, And all the saints with You.
6 It shall come to pass in that day That there will be no light; The lights will diminish.
7 It shall be one day Which is known to the LORD -- Neither day nor night. But at evening time it shall happen That it will be light.
8 And in that day it shall be That living waters shall flow from Jerusalem, Half of them toward the eastern sea And half of them toward the western sea; In both summer and winter it shall occur.

HankD

 

[robycop3]

....more 'phoniness' from non-Preterists of the past:

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

Benson Commentary:
“….ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel — To preach the gospel in each of them, make what haste you will, until the Son of man shall come — To destroy their capital city, temple, and nation. The destruction of Jerusalem by Titus is often called the coming of the Son of man. See Matthew 24:27; Matthew 24:37; Matthew 24:39; Matthew 24:44; Luke 18:5.”

Barne’s Notes:
“…Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel ... - That is, in fleeing from persecutors from one city to another, you shall not have gone to every city in Judea until the end of the Jewish economy shall occur. See the notes at Matthew 24:28-30. By "the coming of the Son of Man," that is, of "Christ," is probably meant the destruction of Jerusalem, which happened about thirty years after this was spoken. The words are often used in this sense. See Matthew 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27, Luke 21:32.”

JF&B:
“….Ye shall not have gone over—Ye shall in nowise have completed.
the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come—To understand this—as Lange and others do—in the first instance, of Christ's own peregrinations, as if He had said, "Waste not your time upon hostile places, for I Myself will be after you ere your work be over"—seems almost trifling. "The coming of the Son of man" has a fixed doctrinal sense, here referring immediately to the crisis of Israel's history as the visible kingdom of God, when Christ was to come and judge it; when "the wrath would come upon it to the uttermost"; and when, on the ruins of Jerusalem and the old economy, He would establish His own kingdom. This, in the uniform language of Scripture, is more immediately "the coming of the Son of man," "the day of vengeance of our God" (Mt 16:28; 24:27, 34; compare with Heb 10:25; Jas 5:7-9)—but only as being such a lively anticipation of His second coming for vengeance and deliverance. So understood, it is parallel with Mt 24:14 (on which see).”

Cambridge Bible For Schools:
“…till the Son of man be come] The passage in Luke 21, which is to a great extent parallel to this, treats of the destruction of Jerusalem; and no one who carefully weighs our Lord’s words can fail to see that in a real sense He came in the destruction of Jerusalem. That event was in truth the judgment of Christ falling on the unrepentant nation. In this sense the Gospel had not been preached to all the cities of Israel before Christ came.”

Three posts os largely-incorrect stuff. He did NOT return when Jerusalem & the temple were destroyed, simple as THAT! His return is to be in great power & glory, as He said.

Matthew 24:23 Then if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Christ,’ or 'There He is,’ DO NOT BELIEVE HIM. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. 25 Behold, I have told you in advance. 26 So if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out, or, ‘Behold, He is in the inner rooms,’ DO NOT BELIEVE THEM. 27 For just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes even to the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be.

MATTHEW 24:30 And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory.

Who does "all the tribes of the earth" leave out?

So, we see Jesus' return will be in great power & glory, SEEN BY ALL. Are ya gonna tell us Jesus was wrong about some of the details if His own return?

No, I choose to believe Jesus' own words over any pret blather.