DavidPT
Well-Known Member
- Sep 26, 2016
- 8,602
- 2,107
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
I understand. Sorry, I just noticed I am in the eschatology forum. Partial Preterism would definatly not be welcome here. Thanks for engaging. Be blessed.
I'm not trying to throw the baby out with the bath water. All of us are partial Preterists to some degree. For example, the cross, then the resurrection followed by the ascension. No one that I know of would apply any of those things as future events yet to happen. As to those events, that makes everyone partial Preterists, well except for full Preterists. They obviously can't be partial if they are instead full.
But as to the gospel accounts, which includes the Discourse, not everyone takes everything written in those accounts only to be involving up to 70 AD. That's what I'm meaning I could never be a Preterist about, some of those things, such as what we are discussing in regards to the wheat and tares. Surely, the end of the age meant can't be meaning 70 AD, but is literally meaning the end of the age we are presently still living in.
IMO, you don't need to bow out of this discussion for the reasons you gave. Your input is welcomed just like everyone else's hopefully is. It doesn't mean one has to agree with you, though. But that shouldn't mean you don't have a right to express your opinion, then.
Upvote
0