what part of the Nicene creed was abused?

Status
Not open for further replies.

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I have seen very little (if any) exclusively full pretertist, and therefore anti-nicene views espoused in this forum.

As a strong partial parterist, i can understand how those less familiar with the theology would assume certain affirmations were exclusive to full preterism, but in truth, Full preterists have very few views (only 1 or two actually) that are exclusive to FULL preterism, while the bulk of their preterist understanding is shared with orthodox preterism.

The Statement of purpose CF has posted, gives a decent delineation between what is acceptable partial preterist views and what are unacceptable full preterist views:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7748609/

Partial Preterism: Partial preterism holds that most eschatological prophecies, such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the Antichrists, the Great Tribulation, and the advent of the Day of the Lord as a "judgment-coming" of Christ, were fulfilled either in AD 70 or during the persecution of Christians under the Emperor Nero. The Second coming and the resurrection of the dead, however, have not yet occurred in the partial preterist system.

I have asked for a Mod review of this particular sticky, to make sure all members and mods are on the same page.
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
From what I gather from the CF Rules sticky above, Claiming Jesus Christ Came in Judgement as a "Day of the Lord" event against Apostate 1st century Jerusalem in 70 AD, and Israel went through the "Great Tribulation" at that time, and Christ and the apostles foretold of that Judgement coming in that generation, falls under orthodox partial preterism, and is completely allowed for discussion in the Eschatology forums, as long as one does not also claim He is not coming yet again.

I get why this could be a Moderators nightmare trying to parse through the intent of the post/poster, but CF chose to define partial preterism the way they did above (co opting wiki's definition, and rightfully so IMO), and have chosen to allow orthodox partial preterism to be discussed/debated in the Eschatology forums. Therefore, I believe it is incumbent upon CF to train their Mods how to discern where that cutoff point actually is, even if it might require near surgical precision.

Tough Job. Glad it's not mine.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

A New Dawn

God is bigger than the boogeyman!
Mar 18, 2004
70,094
7,684
Raxacoricofallapatorius
Visit site
✟119,554.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I am closing this thread. I have already spoken with a couple of members about this, and if anyone else is interested, they can PM me or go to the Members Services Center and speak with an admin there. If there is any forthcoming news about how things will be interpreted, I will post it in the announcement I made earlier today.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.