Full Preterism and the Lord's Supper

[solid_core]

Am I right thinking that a full preterist:
- does not practice the Lord's Supper
- does not pray Our Father prayer
- does not await a final judgement and the resurrection if his body
- must therefore reject the apostolic and nicean creed?

What about baptism? Is it practiced by full preterists?

 

[Josheb]

I am not full-pret (I'm partial-pret). As far as the Lord's supper goes, I suspect a full-pret will simply say the Lord's supper was practiced by the first century ekklesia as a means to "...proclaim the Lord's death until He comes," and although their view is the Lord has come (at least in the sense assigned 1 Cor. 11), there is no reason the NT-era practice need abandoning. The Lord's Supper is, after all, a conversion of the Passover seder which the ekklesia has assimilated and modified to be consistent with the Passover sacrifice of The Lamb of God, Jesus the anointed one.

Technically, even though Jesus was celebrating the Passover meal he did so a day early. Jesus was hanging on the cross at Passover. He was the Pascal Lamb. Jesus is reported saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me," which can be taken to say every time we drink we should do so in remembrance of him.

The modern institutional church has completely changed the Lord's Supper. It was originally a supper! an entire meal, not wafers of compressed bread and thimbles of wine or grape juice. It was so large that some in Corinth acted gluttonously and others became inebriated... and were admonished for doing so. I see no reason why full-prets couldn't have remembrance meals and be consistent with both scripture, the practice of Christ and the NT-era ekklesia, and their own eschatology.

I'll defer the other matters with curiosity of my own to the full-prets.

 

[Josheb]

Why include baptism? Is there scripture that would preclude full-prets from baptizing?

 

[solid_core]

Why include baptism? Is there scripture that would preclude full-prets from baptizing?

If Jesus came in the first century and all was fulfilled, then what exactly from the New testament is for us? Because almost everything is directed to the church before the coming. There are no instructions on how to live or what to practice in "new heavens and new earth".

 

[Josheb]

If Jesus came in the first century and all was fulfilled, then what exactly from the New testament is for us? Because almost everything is directed to the church before the coming. There are no instructions on how to live or what to practice in "new heavens and new earth".

Again: I am not full-pret. My answer will be different from their positions. However, it is safe to say they would apply all the priniciples ensconced in the historical teachings and past events. Just because Jesus came in the first century does not mean his teaching suddenly became irrelevant. That would be a gross misrepresentation of preterist views.

 

[solid_core]

Again: I am not full-pret. My answer will be different from their positions. However, it is safe to say they would apply all the priniciples ensconced in the historical teachings and past events. Just because Jesus came in the first century does not mean his teaching suddenly became irrelevant. That would be a gross misrepresentation of preterist views.

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another...
...Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world...
Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."
Mt 25:31-41

How do they explain this?

Also, are there any good books or sources to find answers and holistic preterist eschatology? Most preterist sites I found are unusable, weird and chaotic.

 

[Josheb]

How do they explain this?

I'm gonna let the full-prets speak for themselves for the rest of your inquiries. My op-reply was posted because I don't see any conflict with the first inquiry and full-preterism (I could be wrong).

Also, are there any good books or sources to find answers and holistic preterist eschatology? Most preterist sites I found are unusable, weird and chaotic.

I don't know what "holistic" preterism is.

I do know that you can read about preterist perspectives to heart's content at...

The Preterist Archive

The International Preterist Association (which I find lacking)

Theopedia's article on preterism.


It should be understood 1) Preterism is simply the view Biblical prophesies have been fulfilled, 2) Full preterism is a very small portion of preterists and an even smaller portion of Christianity. 2) every Christian is preterist in that all Christians believe all of the Old Testament prophesies predicting the future Messiah are fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth (that is what makes us Christians ), and 4) Preterism isn't solely about eschatology; its roots are Christological, not eschatological.


I encourage everyone to read Kim Riddlebarger's "The Case for Amillennialism," because he does not view himself as a preterist and is critical of post-millennial preterism but his book does an excellent job of exegeting scripture in a manner most partial-preterists can commend. His wielding of scripture is commendable, imo. For a more post-millennial view then I suggest Ken Gentry's books. A scathing look at Dispensational Premillennialism from a partial-pret pov can be found in Gary Demar's "Last Day's Madness" and comparative studies by noted scholars can be found on the eschatological tomes from Zondervan's Counterpoint Series and the Robert Clouse book, "The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views."

 

[solid_core]

I'm gonna let the full-prets speak for themselves for the rest of your inquiries. My op-reply was posted because I don't see any conflict with the first inquiry and full-preterism (I could be wrong).

I don't know what "holistic" preterism is.

I do know that you can read about preterist perspectives to heart's content at...

The Preterist Archive

The International Preterist Association (which I find lacking)

Theopedia's article on preterism.


It should be understood 1) Preterism is simply the view Biblical prophesies have been fulfilled, 2) Full preterism is a very small portion of preterists and an even smaller portion of Christianity. 2) every Christian is preterist in that all Christians believe all of the Old Testament prophesies predicting the future Messiah are fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth (that is what makes us Christians ), and 4) Preterism isn't solely about eschatology; its roots are Christological, not eschatological.


I encourage everyone to read Kim Riddlebarger's "The Case for Amillennialism," because he does not view himself as a preterist and is critical of post-millennial preterism but his book does an excellent job of exegeting scripture in a manner most partial-preterists can commend. His wielding of scripture is commendable, imo. For a more post-millennial view then I suggest Ken Gentry's books. A scathing look at Dispensational Premillennialism from a partial-pret pov can be found in Gary Demar's "Last Day's Madness" and comparative studies by noted scholars can be found on the eschatological tomes from Zondervan's Counterpoint Series and the Robert Clouse book, "The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views."

Thanks. By "holistic" I meant "systematic", I was finding only some small pieces and various opinions, nothing as a whole.

I began to read ebook "The Parousia: A Critical Inquiry into The New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord".

I hope it will give me some answers.