Full or part preterism eschatology

[msmorality]

Anyone who can sum this up with just the basics Thanks.

 

[Tavita]

*bump*

 

[msmorality]

.

 

[Tavita]

Are there any Preterists out there who can outlay the basics of what you believe or point us in the right direction?

I'm very interested in it too...

 

[ThatWhichIsnt]

Partial preterist interpretation of the Revelation, by chapter

This is a good start. Read a few pages.


http://www.apocalipsis.org/preterism.htm

 

[msmorality]

Partial preterist interpretation of the Revelation, by chapter

This is a good start. Read a few pages.


A short introduction to Preterism

Great thank you.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Great thank you.

I really don't know how CF defines it but from what I understand, a PP is one that believe only some of the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in the 1st century, what FPs believe ALL of it was fulfilled.
I could be wrong tho but you may want to check out this Partial Preterist site for more info

http://www.preteristsite.com/plain/warrenend.html

There are two primary camps within preterism on this issue:

proponents of the latter view [that holds that the entire enchilada primarily belongs to the first century [Switch-Off]] , include Dan Trotter and Gary DeMar

and proponents of the former view [that there is a break in Matthew 24 beginning with either verse 35 or 36 [Switch-On]] include Kenneth Gentry and Marcellus Kik

 

[msmorality]

I really don't know how CF defines it but from what I understand, a PP is one that believe only some of the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in the 1st century, what FPs believe ALL of it was fulfilled.
I could be wrong tho but you may want to check out this Partial Preterist site for more info

http://www.preteristsite.com/plain/warrenend.html

There are two primary camps within preterism on this issue:

proponents of the latter view [that holds that the entire enchilada primarily belongs to the first century [Switch-Off]] , include Dan Trotter and Gary DeMar

and proponents of the former view [that there is a break in Matthew 24 beginning with either verse 35 or 36 [Switch-On]] include Kenneth Gentry and Marcellus Kik

Thank you, this is very helpful...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Partial preterist interpretation of the Revelation, by chapter

This is a good start. Read a few pages

How much of Revelation do PPs view as fulfilled?

Partial preterist interpretation of the Revelation, by chapter

In the last few months there have been several threads that specifically discuss, or briefly touch on, partial preterist eschatology. Literally every time one of these discussions arises, I see numerous false assumptions and misunderstandings made about partial preterism. For those interested, I have provided here a brief, chapter-by-chapter explanation of how the partial preterists interpret the Revelation. Understand that this is not the case for all partial preterists, it is simply the generality.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Thank you, this is very helpful...

Your welcome
It can be a tad confusing at times

 

[msmorality]

Your welcome
It can be a tad confusing at times

Do you believe the Partial or Full Preterism ?

 

[he-man]

Thank you, this is very helpful...

Historicism is a Christian eschatological view that interprets some prophecies of the Bible, especially Daniel and Revelation, as being fulfilled in a continuous line from ancient Jewish history through the End of the Age or the End of the World.

The Early Church Fathers generally identified the four kingdoms of Daniel as Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome, a view which also prevailed among Jewish interpreters after the Roman occupation of Judea Jerome specifically identified the four kingdoms of Daniel 2 in this way A beast in Revelation 13 was also interpreted as the empire of Rome. The "city on seven hills" in Revelation is understood by the majority of modern scholarly commentators as a reference to Rome.

Comments on the table in the Daniel 8 Appendix indicate that the expositors suggested that the Exceedingly Great Horn was Antiochus, the Antichrist or Mohammed. Which was the apostate church.

2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

 

[msmorality]

Revelation was accepted into the canon at the Council of Carthage of 397 AD.[31] Revelation's place in the canon was not guaranteed, however, with doubts raised as far back as the 2nd century about its character, symbolism, and apostolic authorship.[32]
2nd century Christians in Syria rejected it because Montanism, a sect which was deemed to be heretical by the mainstream church, relied heavily on it.[33] In the 4th century, Gregory of Nazianzus and other bishops argued against including Revelation because of the difficulties of interpreting it and the risk of abuse. In the 16th century, Martin Luther initially considered it to be "neither apostolic nor prophetic" and stated that "Christ is neither taught nor known in it",[34] and placed it in his Antilegomena, i.e. his list of questionable documents, though he did retract this view in later life. In the same century, John Calvin believed the book to be canonical, yet it was the only New Testament book on which he did not write a commentary.[35] It remains the only book of the New Testament that is not read within the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church, though it is included in Catholic and Protestant liturgies.
According to Merrill Unger and Gary N. Larson, in spite of the objections that have been raised over the years, Revelation provides a logical conclusion, not just to the New Testament, but to the Christian Bible as a whole, and there is a continuous tradition dating back to the 2nd century which supports the authenticity of the document, and which indicates that it was generally included within the, as yet unformalized, canon of the early church.[36]

Religious views
Most of the interpretations fall into one or more of the following categories:
Historicist, which sees in Revelation a broad view of history;
Preterist, in which Revelation mostly refers to the events of the apostolic era (1st century);
Futurist, which believes that Revelation describes future events; and
Idealist, or Symbolic, which holds that Revelation does not refer to actual people or events, but is an allegory of the spiritual path and the ongoing struggle between good and evil.
Other interpretations are as follows:



Orthodox icon of the Apocalypse of St. John (16th century)
Eastern Orthodoxy treats the text as simultaneously describing contemporaneous events (events occurring at the same time) and as prophecy of events to come, for which the contemporaneous events were a form of foreshadow. It rejects attempts to determine, before the fact, if the events of Revelation are occurring by mapping them onto present-day events, taking to heart the Scriptural warning against those who proclaim "He is here!" prematurely. Instead, the book is seen as a warning to be spiritually and morally ready for the end times, whenever they may come ("as a thief in the night"), but they will come at the time of God's choosing, not something that can be precipitated nor trivially deduced by mortals.[42] This view is also held by many Catholics, although there is a diversity of opinion about the nature of the Apocalypse within Catholicism.
Book of Revelation is the only book of the New Testament that is not read during services by the Eastern Orthodox Church. In the Coptic Orthodox Church (which is not in communion with the Eastern Orthodox church but is liturgically similar), the whole Book of Revelation is read during Apocalypse Night or Bright Saturday

Source : Book of Revelation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[he-man]

Religious views
Most of the interpretations fall into one or more of the following categories:
Historicist, which sees in Revelation a broad view of history;
Preterist, in which Revelation mostly refers to the events of the apostolic era (1st century);
Futurist, which believes that Revelation describes future events; and
Idealist, or Symbolic, which holds that Revelation does not refer to actual people or events, but is an allegory of the spiritual path and the ongoing struggle between good and evil.
Other interpretations are as follows:
Source : Book of Revelation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Historicism is a Christian eschatological view that interprets some prophecies of the Bible, especially Daniel and Revelation, as being fulfilled in a continuous line from ancient Jewish history through the End of the Age or the End of the World.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicism_(Christianity)