How I came to embrace Preterism.

Parousia70 quotes:

In scripture, When God places a time limit on the fulfillment of prophesy, it is always given to be understood by how time relates to man, NOT how time relates to God. Every time, without fail.

Click to expand...

Thanx for the clarification.

Perhaps when you have time you might show where the millenial reign of Jesus was?

<><

EchoPneuma said:

When I truly began to study it for myself and look at the passages in CONTEXT and look at the Greek words....I was changed. Now it all makes sense.

Click to expand...

I’m going to confess my ignorance about your beliefs. I never really looked at it closely enough and therefore didn’t understand the point of views being discussed here. I visited several sites but still find it difficult to grasp whatever it is being proposed. How is it clear from scriptures that Jesus returned and setup his kingdom already?

How is it a spiritual event that Jesus returned and judged those that killed him?

Why are we still here?

Why hasn’t all evil ceased while Jesus is reigning on earth?

I can’t see any clear answers to these and many others in the scriptures.

parousia70 said:

In scripture, When God places a time limit on the fulfillment of prophesy, it is always given to be understood by how time relates to man, NOT how time relates to God. Every time, without fail.

An excellent article on this here:
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Preterism/Odyssey/o-gillespie_02.html

Exerpt:
Our first reference is Genesis 7:1-4. There, God told Noah:

Enter the ark, you and all your household; for you alone I have seen to be righteous before Me in this time [generation]. You shall take with you of ever clean animal by sevens, a male and his female; and of the animals that are not clean two, a male and his female; also of the birds of the sky, by sevens, male and female, to keep offspring alive on the face of all the earth. For after seven more days, I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights; and I will blot our from the face of the land every living thing that I have made.



​

There are several things in this passage that should be noted. First, this is a prophecy of judgment. Secondly, God declared when the judgment, i.e., the rain, would start. Thirdly, He stated how long the rain would last. Fourthly, God spoke this to Noah, a man trapped in time. God was very specific as to when the rain would begin and to how long it would last. God told Noah that after seven days it would rain for forty days and nights. Now, our first question regarding this passage is not how we should interpret what God said, but how would Noah interpret what God said. Would he understand that God was outside time? That is to say, the references that God made concerning when the judgment would come were to be measured by how time relates to God? Applying the futurist’s interpretation of 2 Peter 3:8-9 to this passage, was God telling Noah that after 7,000 years it would begin to rain and once it started raining, it would continue for 40,000 years? Or should the plain, everyday definitions of the terms be understood? We find our answer in verse’s 10 and 12:

And it came about after the seven days, that the water of the flood came upon the earth¼ And the rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights.​

​

Here, just a few short verses later, we have the fulfillment of that prophecy. This shows us that God meant exactly what He said to Noah. Seven days equaled seven days. Forty days and nights equaled forty days and nights.


.....The timing of the prophecy is just as important as the events of the prophecy. Think about that for a moment. What purpose would it serve if God gave a specific prophecy of judgment to a wicked nation, telling them that He would fulfill it within a specific time frame, and warned those people of the coming judgment, if the time passages (and the whole prophecy itself for that matter) were actually for some other generation of people? What purpose would the warnings serve the nation to whom it was originally given? To be quite honest, it wouldn’t serve any purpose at all. How would that nation interpret the character and nature of God? That is to say, how would those people view God if He swore that He would judge them at a certain time, and then He didn’t follow through with His judgment? What would they think of God? That He can’t be trusted? That He speaks empty words and threats? That He lied?

....Lastly, let’s look at a passage that has tremendous relevance to the subject at hand. In Ezekiel 12:21-28, it is written:

Then the word of the Lord came to me saying, "Son of man, what is this proverb you people have concerning the land of Israel, saying, ‘The days are long and every vision fails?’ Therefore say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord God, "I will make this proverb cease so that they will no longer use it as a proverb in Israel." But tell them, "The days a draw near as well as the fulfillment of every vision. For there will no longer be any false vision or flattering divination within the house of Israel. For I the Lord shall speak, and whatever word I speak will be performed. It will no longer be delayed, for in you days, O rebellious house, I shall speak the word and perform it," declares the Lord God.’ " Furthermore, the word of the Lord came to me saying, "Son of man, behold, the house of Israel is saying, ‘The vision that he sees is for many years from now, and he prophesies of times far off.’ Therefore say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord God, "None of My words will be delayed any longer. Whatever word I speak will be performed," ’ " declares the Lord God.​

​

In this passage the nation of Israel said that the time statements of God’s word were irrelevant. This is exactly what the futurist claims about the time statements concerning the return of Christ in the first century. They say, just like Israel, "Those passages were not for the original audience but were ‘for many years from now’ and for ‘times far off.’ " But notice what God thinks about that kind of hermeneutic. God said, "None of My words will be delayed any longer. Whatever word I speak will be performed." He stated that He would say the word and He would perform it. Again, notice the implication of that statement. God Himself fulfills His word. When we try and mis-use 2 Peter 3:8-9 as a formula to interpret prophetic time, i.e., that the imminent time statements in the New Testament concerning Christ’s return in the first century are really "for many years from now," i.e., our time, we are saying that God will not fulfill His word! So the real issue here is not just differences of interpretation concerning eschatology, but the nature and character of God. ........ If the futurist is correct, then we might as well be atheists because God Himself cannot even be trusted, and then we are lost. Why? Because, if God is dishonest concerning when He would fulfill His word, how do we know He was honest concerning the doctrines of Grace? Or anything else for that matter? It’s simple. We don’t. So, again, this is much more than just a difference of interpretation. Our salvation depends on God keeping every aspect of His word. Including when He was to fulfill it.

Click to expand...

Excellent point P70

daneel said:

Thanx for the clarification.

Perhaps when you have time you might show where the millenial reign of Jesus was?

<><

Click to expand...

Preterists, like futurists, have varying degrees of agreement and disagreement between one another.

I can only speak on how I personally understand The Millennium.
I make no claim that this is the default "preterist" position:

The Thousand year reign was fulfilled By Jesus Christ on His heavenly throne between AD 30 & AD 70 and was typified by the entire length of the Davidic Monarchy, David Being the First King in the line who reigned forty years, Christ being the last in line, also a 40 year reign, A period which lasted apporxamately 1000 years.

Jesus was able to fulfill what all other human kings in the line had faild to accomplish. In Christ, the purpose for the Davidic reign was accomplished, and through Christ, the "1000 year" Davidic reign was completed.

parousia70 said:

Preterists, like futurists, have varying degrees of agreement and disagreement between one another.

I can only speak on how I personally understand The Millennium.
I make no claim that this is the default "preterist" position:

The Thousand year reign was fulfilled By Jesus Christ on His heavenly throne between AD 30 & AD 70 and was typified by the entire length of the Davidic Monarchy, David Being the First King in the line who reigned forty years, Christ being the last in line, also a 40 year reign, A period which lasted apporxamately 1000 years.

Jesus was able to fulfill what all other human kings in the line had faild to accomplish. In Christ, the purpose for the Davidic reign was accomplished, and through Christ, the "1000 year" Davidic reign was completed.

Click to expand...

thanx

<><

Tawhano said:

I’m going to confess my ignorance about your beliefs. I never really looked at it closely enough and therefore didn’t understand the point of views being discussed here. I visited several sites but still find it difficult to grasp whatever it is being proposed. How is it clear from scriptures that Jesus returned and setup his kingdom already?

How is it a spiritual event that Jesus returned and judged those that killed him?

Click to expand...

In AD 67-70, coincident with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple at the end of the Old Covenant age, Jesus "came" in the manner and tradition of Yahweh's old testament comings. The cloud-coming of Revelation 1:7 that "every eye would see" is shown in Revelation 14:14-20 to be an event that occurs in the heavenly realms. As the passage reveals, Christ's actions and commands in the heavenlies result in various tribulation-period disasters that transpire on earth. Simply put, Revelation 14:14-20 is the cloud-coming that "every eye would see." This is significant, for St. John is not describing the coming of Christ as some visual spectacular with cumulus clouds in the skies overhead, but as the coming of Yahweh himself, making Christ equal with the Father. Jesus promised his apostles that he would return in their lifetimes "in the glory of the Father" (Matt 16:27-28; Lk. 9:26; Matt 24:33-34). Christ's return at AD 67-70 was precisely in the manner and tradition of Yahweh's Old-Testament-era comings. We have countless examples of the Father coming in His great glory during the Old Testamental period (be sure to note the graphic, physical descriptions and explicit "visual" connotations of Yahweh's comings):These are just a few examples of the Father's Old-Testament comings, but there are many others: Yahweh came down and shot arrows at Saul and his armies, shaking the earth's foundations and the heavens at that time (2 Sam 22:8-16); Yahweh is depicted as having destroyed the universe when he judged Israel through Babylon (Jer 4:22-30), and did so again when he judged Egypt by Babylon's King Nebuchadnezzar (Ez 32:1-16). The Father entered into judgments with Egypt and Assyria in a spectacular coming in Isaiah 31. Habakkuk's depiction of Jehovah's coming at Mt. Sinai is nothing less than apocalyptic (Hab 3:3-16). Were any of these OT comings visual, physical/literal appearances of Yahweh as the prophets describe in metaphorical prophetic language? Of course not (Jn 1:18; 1 Jn 4:12)--the Hebrews understood that no human could ever see Yahweh and live (Exodus 33:20). Importantly, these comings of the Father form the entire backdrop for the doctrine of the "coming" of Christ, for it was in this manner of the Father's glory that Christ said he would come (Matt 16:27-28; Lk. 9:26; Matt 24:33-34). As stated in Matthew 21:40-45, the Lord of the Vineyard came to the apostate leaders of first-century Israel and was The Stone that crushed them to powder, removing the Kingdom of God from them and giving it to a new Nation. Jesus Christ, the Lord of heaven and earth, came in the glory of the Father and did so in the lifetimes of the apostles, exactly as he promised (Matt 16:27-28; 24:33-34).

Why are we still here?

Click to expand...

Why shouldn't we be?

Why hasn’t all evil ceased while Jesus is reigning on earth?

Click to expand...

Are you an annihilationist?
The elect and unelect were created by God to exist forever.
Victory over evil and death is reserved for the regenerate only.
The unregenerate will never share in Christ's victory over evil and death.
They suffer in their sin forever
There will always be sin and evil, even in the New Heavens and earth time period, no matter when you think that will be:

Rev. 22:15 But outside [the gates of the New Jerusalem, after it has decended onto the new earth] are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.

I can’t see any clear answers to these and many others in the scriptures.

Click to expand...

Stick around and you just might!

HM and P70, good seeing you guys. I love to read your posts. Always challenging and thought provoking.

EchoPneuma said:

Someone who believes that Jesus was telling the truth when He told His followers that He would return in their lifetimes.

Read Luke 21 IN CONTEXT.....and you will see it too. Remember He is talking to THEM and not YOU...He is answering THEIR question and telling THEM about the signs that THEY are to look for. He wasn't speaking into the air in that chapter, He is speaking to the disciples who asked Him the question at the beginning of the chapter. His answer to THAT QUESTION makes up the whole of Luke 21.

A preterist is a person who takes Jesus at His word. If He said He was going to come back during the lifetimes of those who were standing around Him....THEN HE DID. That many don't understand HOW He did it seems to be the problem. Since He didn't do it the way they think He should have, then they say He really HASN'T returned even yet.....thereby making Jesus out to be a liar to those who He spoke those words to.

Click to expand...

Well did he not return to redeem Paul the apostle? I mean as the Messenger of the Lord did Jesus not come and go all throughout history? He appeared as a man before his birth and to Paul after his assention, why would anyone teach that there are only two comings to begin with?

Bananna

Bananna said:

Well did he not return to redeem Paul the apostle?

Click to expand...

Yes, In fulfilment of Acts 1:11.

I mean as the Messenger of the Lord did Jesus not come and go all throughout history?

Click to expand...

Most Certainly.

He appeared as a man before his birth and to Paul after his assention, why would anyone teach that there are only two comings to begin with?

Bananna

Click to expand...

Excellent point Bananna. Although some would argue a post incarnation view is implicit in the term "second coming", I would agree that disregarding the myriad ways Christ came in the past, is coming now, and will come again, hinders ones understanding of the docrtine of the coming of Christ.

Bananna said:

Well did he not return to redeem Paul the apostle? I mean as the Messenger of the Lord did Jesus not come and go all throughout history? He appeared as a man before his birth and to Paul after his assention, why would anyone teach that there are only two comings to begin with?

Bananna

Click to expand...

One Coming with Two Phases

The fact is the Old Testament Jewish prophets never even heard of a second coming in the Old Testament. The Jews never had the concept of a (second coming) and since it was the Jews God’s prophets who first taught the notion of a Messiah, it seems quite reasonable to respect their inspired opinion more then anyone else’s today.

They say one short fulfillment period with two phases to it: a suffering humiliation phase and a victorious consummation phase. This is the way the Jews have always viewed it, therefore Jesus could also say. When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes. (NIV Matthew 10:23) Jesus like the Old Testament prophets never distinguish between two different coming separated by thousands of years. This kind of language is not used by the Christ or his old testament prophets (see Isa. 35:4-6, 40:10-11, 61:1-2, 62:11, 63:1-6, 66:6-16; Zech. 14; and Mal.4:1-6)

There for before anyone in our day who is not inspired can assign verses to 2.000 years in our future, they must first prove to me from the old testament or new testament that the Jewish writers clearly distinguished between two different coming of Christ.

In fact the phrases “second coming” and “final coming” are not mentioned anywhere in scripture. It is a gentile concept that is totally alien to Biblical Judaism that is in the Bible. This is a vital point that is totally ignored today. The Jewish prophets never implied two comings divided by centuries. The only place in the NT which even comes close to teaching a second advent is Heb. 9:28 where it says Christ will (appear a second time).

This was using the Jewish symbolism of the High Priest at Yom Kippur when he took the blood into the holy place and then reappeared back outside the tabernacle (Temple) to announce that atonement had been accomplished. So my question would remain the same. Please show me were an old testament prophet clearly says there is a (second coming) many centuries away from the first appearing.

Jesus also makes this point when talking with the high priest Caiaphas.

And the high priest arose and said to Him, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!” Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” (Mathew 26:62-64) Notice here that Jesus said Caiaphas would see his return (not us). Jesus held the very same Jewish concept about his return as his Old Testament prophets. Jesus never distinguished between two different coming separated by thousands of years. He said Caiaphas would see his return.

There is another dilemma in scripture. Talking about the time of the end Paul said: Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. (1Cor 10:11) According to Paul all the things that happen in the wilderness were examples to (them the first century saints) upon whom the ends of the world had come. End of what world? The end of the world of Judaism. No temple no system of Judaism.

These things were written for their admonition because it was their fore fathers who were scattered in the wilderness. We never had family scattered in the wilderness or baptized into Moses ( 1 Cor. 10:1-5) The first century saints were living at the end of the world, as Paul has clearly said. They were living in end time. How do I know this? Because the Covenant we live in has on end. Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, (Hebrew 13:20) You cannot put a end on a everlasting covenant, but you can on the covenant of the law which happen in AD-70.

The writer Of Hebrews also said speaking of Jesus. He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the world, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself (Heb. 9:28 KJV) Some Bible say (age or world) but the point is the same. This is the very same end Paul clearly says was upon the first century saints.

What happen a few short years after Paul and the writer of Hebrews said these words? The end of there know world, came to a end with the destruction of the temple and the system of Biblical Judaism.

As I have been saying before anyone in our day who is not inspired can assign verses to 2.000 years in our future, they must first prove to me from the old testament or new testament that the Jewish writers clearly distinguished between two different coming of Christ. Jesus never did (Mathew 26:62-64).

Just look at these scriptures. In Luke 4:18-20 the day of vengeance of our God is left out when compared to Isaiah’s version of this scripture. That is because the day of vengeance of our God was to be fulfilled according to Luke 21:20-24 and that was when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. When that happened was in 70 AD and that was also when all things which are written, may be fulfilled. So then in Luke 4:18-20 was when Jesus was ministering on earth and Luke 21 was when Jesus came in the clouds of judgment fulfilling the rest of Isaiah 61 about the day of vengeance of our God.

Christ came as a suffering servant in the physical realm and then He came as a conquering King in the spiritual realm on the Day of Vengeance in 70 AD. Just like the Father would use another nation to execute judgment on Israel when Israel had forsaken God in the Old Testament, so also did Jesus use the Roman army to destroy Jerusalem as a result of rejecting Him and persecuting the saints of the first century.

Luke 4
18”The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me,
Because He has anointed Me To preach the gospel to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives And recovery of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed;
19To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD.”

20Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21And He began to say to them, “Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”

Isaiah 61

The Good News of Salvation

The Good News of Salvation
1 “The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon Me,
Because the LORD has anointed Me To preach good tidings to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives, And the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
2To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD,
And the day of vengeance of our God;

Luke 21

The Destruction of Jerusalem
20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. 24And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

parousia70 said:

Yes, In fulfilment of Acts 1:11.



Most Certainly.



Excellent point Bananna. Although some would argue a post incarnation view is implicit in the term "second coming", I would agree that disregarding the myriad ways Christ came in the past, is coming now, and will come again, hinders ones understanding of the docrtine of the coming of Christ.

Click to expand...

After AD70 or the fulfillment of scripture I agree, Christ can and has come in many ways all thoughout history.

Hidden Manna said:

After AD70 or the fulfillment of scripture I agree, Christ can and has come in many ways all thoughout history.

Click to expand...

Hay HM.

Couple questions:
Why the disclaimer?
Why would you say Christ has only come in many ways "after" AD70?

As Bananna pointed out, Christ appeared as a man prior to the incarnation and also appeared to Paul and Stephen prior to AD70.
I'm curious why you would say these were not "comings of Christ"?

Secondly, and this is just my personal bent, I don't subscribe to the notion that all scripture was completely and totally fulfilled at AD70 and will never realize any greater level of fulfillment. You may, but I suspect when pressed, you'd agree with me that there are certain scriptures that, by their very nature, are in a permament state of being fulfilled in an ongioing fashion, and will never reach "complete fulfillment".

For Example:
Isaiah 9:7
"of the Increase of His government and of His peace there shall be no end"

Was that scripture completely fulfilled in AD70, or is it continuing to be fulfilled today, and indeed will be fulfilled in a far greater scope in our future?

Perhaps I'm splitting hairs, and simply arguing semantics, but I've found that being clear in affirming it was "all Biblical ESCHATOLOGY" that was fulfilled in AD70 and not "all scripture", better articulates the preterist position to those who question it, and takes away a common objection before it can be raised.

Agree?
Disagree?

parousia70 said:

Hay HM.

Couple questions:
Why the disclaimer?
Why would you say Christ has only come in many ways "after" AD70?

As Bananna pointed out, Christ appeared as a man prior to the incarnation and also appeared to Paul and Stephen prior to AD70.
I'm curious why you would say these were not "comings of Christ"?

Secondly, and this is just my personal bent, I don't subscribe to the notion that all scripture was completely and totally fulfilled at AD70 and will never realize any greater level of fulfillment. You may, but I suspect when pressed, you'd agree with me that there are certain scriptures that, by their very nature, are in a permament state of being fulfilled in an ongioing fashion, and will never reach "complete fulfillment".

For Example:
Isaiah 9:7
"of the Increase of His government and of His peace there shall be no end"

Was that scripture completely fulfilled in AD70, or is it continuing to be fulfilled today, and indeed will be fulfilled in a far greater scope in our future?

Perhaps I'm splitting hairs, and simply arguing semantics, but I've found that being clear in affirming it was "all Biblical ESCHATOLOGY" that was fulfilled in AD70 and not "all scripture", better articulates the preterist position to those who question it, and takes away a common objection before it can be raised.

Agree?
Disagree?

Click to expand...

Agree. All prophecies concerning the "second coming" of Christ and the "time of the end" have been fulfilled. But the ones like Is 9:7 that concern the eternal state of the kingdom continue to be fulfilled throughout the eons.

Can you think of another scripture that has a continuing fulfillment besides that one in Isaiah? Is there anything else yet to be fulfilled besides the continued growth of the eternal kingdom within the hearts of men?

EchoPneuma said:

Can you think of another scripture that has a continuing fulfillment besides that one in Isaiah? Is there anything else yet to be fulfilled besides the continued growth of the eternal kingdom within the hearts of men?

Click to expand...

Well, I suppose they all have to do with the growth and spread of the Kingdom, in one form or another.

The spread of the Kingdom, the covenant, and the Law of Christ eradicates evil everywhere the gospel is taught and followed, for all dominion belongs to Christ and the Church, now and forever (Matt 28:18; 1 Pet 3:22; Matt 16:18-19; Eph 1:22-23; Isaiah 9:6-7; Daniel 7:14,27; Rev 1:5-6; 2:26-27; 5:10; 11:15). The Church's job is related to dominion and rule over all things, which includes converting people out of wickedness and darkenss into the Kingdom light (Col 1:12-14; Acts 26:18; Rev 21:24-27; 22:14-15). Individuals that are in darkness without the knowledge of the covenant (Eph 2:12) become transformed by the Spirit of God and leave behind darkness as they are translated into the light that is of Christ (Luke 2:32 Cor 4:6; 2 Tim 1:10).

All biblical expectations of the ever-expanding dominion of God's kingdom and righteousness on earth are carried out by, in, and through Christ and His Church (Isaiah 9:6-7; Daniel 7:27; Lk 1:33; Eph 3:9-11,21; Heb 12:27-28; Matt 21:43; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9-10; Rev 2:26; Matt 25:21). The Church is the very Body of Christ, the "fullness of Him that fills all in all" (Eph 1:22-23). As St Paul wrote, "Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever" (Eph 3:21). God's peple must exercise dominion and teach covenantal law. The Church, ruling and reigning with Christ, must continue to bring all created things into accordance with God's law, be it individuals, families, states, governments, or any other aspect of creation. All power in heaven and earth belongs to Christ and his people (Matt 28:18-19; Matt 16:18-19).

Scripture states that the world will exist forever (Ecc 1:4; Ps 78:69; 89:36-37; 104:5; 148:4-6; Eph 3:21) and that human generations are perpetual (Ps 145:13; Dan 4:3,34; Dan 7:14,18,27; Lk 1:33), therefore it is likely that the cosmos, in some form or another, will exist forever and ever.

That being said, The Old Testament Temple--which was itself designed to be a microcosm of the created universe--may demonstrate, by its destruction, that the created cosmos will be brought to a new consummation in our future. I have found no scriptural reason to rule out this possibility. Yet even that would not be an end of God's creation, but, rather, a new outworking of it. For sure, whatever changes God may have in store for the cosmos, the time and details have not been disclosed to men (Deut 29:29).

parousia70 said:

Stick around and you just might!

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. I have copied yours and the other’s post to review tonight but I won’t get back here until Monday. I see one major hurtle I need to contend with and that is your definition and mine of what ‘clear’ means is vastly different.

parousia70 said:

Well, I suppose they all have to do with the growth and spread of the Kingdom, in one form or another.

The spread of the Kingdom, the covenant, and the Law of Christ eradicates evil everywhere the gospel is taught and followed, for all dominion belongs to Christ and the Church, now and forever (Matt 28:18; 1 Pet 3:22; Matt 16:18-19; Eph 1:22-23; Isaiah 9:6-7; Daniel 7:14,27; Rev 1:5-6; 2:26-27; 5:10; 11:15). The Church's job is related to dominion and rule over all things, which includes converting people out of wickedness and darkenss into the Kingdom light (Col 1:12-14; Acts 26:18; Rev 21:24-27; 22:14-15). Individuals that are in darkness without the knowledge of the covenant (Eph 2:12) become transformed by the Spirit of God and leave behind darkness as they are translated into the light that is of Christ (Luke 2:32 Cor 4:6; 2 Tim 1:10).

All biblical expectations of the ever-expanding dominion of God's kingdom and righteousness on earth are carried out by, in, and through Christ and His Church (Isaiah 9:6-7; Daniel 7:27; Lk 1:33; Eph 3:9-11,21; Heb 12:27-28; Matt 21:43; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9-10; Rev 2:26; Matt 25:21). The Church is the very Body of Christ, the "fullness of Him that fills all in all" (Eph 1:22-23). As St Paul wrote, "Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever" (Eph 3:21). God's peple must exercise dominion and teach covenantal law. The Church, ruling and reigning with Christ, must continue to bring all created things into accordance with God's law, be it individuals, families, states, governments, or any other aspect of creation. All power in heaven and earth belongs to Christ and his people (Matt 28:18-19; Matt 16:18-19).

Click to expand...

Yes, all these scriptures basically talk about the unending nature of the kingdom, and how it will continue to grow, increase and spread throughout the eons ahead. I really see these truths as the only prophecies that are left to be fulfilled....and like you said....they will never REALLY reach fulfillment because it is ongoing just like the scripture states..."there will be NO END".

Scripture states that the world will exist forever (Ecc 1:4; Ps 78:69; 89:36-37; 104:5; 148:4-6; Eph 3:21) and that human generations are perpetual (Ps 145:13; Dan 4:3,34; Dan 7:14,18,27; Lk 1:33), therefore it is likely that the cosmos, in some form or another, will exist forever and ever.

Click to expand...

I see how this is probably true. THe blood of Jesus is an ETERNAL cleansing agent, it's called the blood of the "eternal covenant"....so why would God EVER stop applying the blood of Jesus to sinful men who turn to Jesus for salvation? Why WOULD He stop bringing sons to glory? Why would He ever shut the door to heaven and say "we four and no more"......when the blood of Jesus could continue to cleanse men of their sins throughout all eternity?

That being said, The Old Testament Temple--which was itself designed to be a microcosm of the created universe--may demonstrate, by its destruction, that the created cosmos will be brought to a new consummation in our future. I have found no scriptural reason to rule out this possibility. Yet even that would not be an end of God's creation, but, rather, a new outworking of it. For sure, whatever changes God may have in store for the cosmos, the time and details have not been disclosed to men (Deut 29:29).

Click to expand...

I can also see this too. The earthly temple was an exact pattern of what is in heaven....but I don't know if that means the whole universe or not. But the fact that it was destroyed COULD mean that at some time in the distant eons of the future that GOd will allow the sun to darken and planet earth to die. But I wouldn't bet on it

EchoPneuma said:

Yes, all these scriptures basically talk about the unending nature of the kingdom, and how it will continue to grow, increase and spread throughout the eons ahead. I really see these truths as the only prophecies that are left to be fulfilled....and like you said....they will never REALLY reach fulfillment because it is ongoing just like the scripture states..."there will be NO END".

Click to expand...

That is why I maintain that the preterist position is best explained as one that affirms the fulfilment of all biblical eschatology, as opposed to one that affirms the fulfilment of all Biblical prophesy.

It seems to me that preterists who ignore this important distinction when arguing their case, place themselves in the otherwise aviodable position of arguing for something that scripture testifies against.

I see how this is probably true. THe blood of Jesus is an ETERNAL cleansing agent, it's called the blood of the "eternal covenant"....so why would God EVER stop applying the blood of Jesus to sinful men who turn to Jesus for salvation? Why WOULD He stop bringing sons to glory? Why would He ever shut the door to heaven and say "we four and no more"......when the blood of Jesus could continue to cleanse men of their sins throughout all eternity?

Click to expand...

Beats me.

I can also see this too. The earthly temple was an exact pattern of what is in heaven....but I don't know if that means the whole universe or not. But the fact that it was destroyed COULD mean that at some time in the distant eons of the future that GOd will allow the sun to darken and planet earth to die. But I wouldn't bet on it

Click to expand...

Just as I wouldn't bet against it.
Which, in spite of my strong preterist understanding, squarely places me outside of the "Full preterist" camp.
And that's OK by me, I'm very comfortable being a "consistant partial preterist".

parousia70 said:

That is why I maintain that the preterist position is best explained as one that affirms the fulfilment of all biblical eschatology, as opposed to one that affirms the fulfilment of all Biblical prophesy.

It seems to me that preterists who ignore this important distinction when arguing their case, place themselves in the otherwise aviodable position of arguing for something that scripture testifies against.

Click to expand...

I hear ya. We need to be careful about this distinction.

Beats me.

Click to expand...

Me too. I can't imagine any reason why He would eventually close the doors to heaven....considering He IS an eternal God and time means nothing to Him. If humanity continues on another 100 billions years....what is that to God? Like the blink of an eye!

Just as I wouldn't bet against it.
Which, in spite of my strong preterist understanding, squarely places me outside of the "Full preterist" camp.
And that's OK by me, I'm very comfortable being a "consistant partial preterist".

Click to expand...

So as a partial preterist you still believe the Second Coming is in the future? Is that what you mean by "partial" preterist?

I also wouldn't bet against it. God is gonna do what He is gonna do....and like that scripture in Deut. says.....those things not revealed belong to God alone. I wouldn't bet either way. Only God knows what He has in store for earth.

EchoPneuma said:

So as a partial preterist you still believe the Second Coming is in the future? Is that what you mean by "partial" preterist?

Click to expand...

I don't accept the premise of your question Echo.

Second Coming?
What's that?

Christ came in myriad ways in the past, is coming in myriad ways now, and will come in myriad ways in our future.

Would I consider a future to us cosmological consumation resulting in a new outworking of creation a "Coming of Christ"?

ABSOLUTELY.

Do I believe the Bible fortells any details of such an event?

ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Does that help?

parousia70 said:

I don't accept the premise of your question Echo.

Second Coming?
What's that?

Christ came in myriad ways in the past, is coming in myriad ways now, and will come in myriad ways in our future.

Would I consider a future to us cosmological consumation resulting in a new outworking of creation a "Coming of Christ"?

ABSOLUTELY.

Do I believe the Bible fortells any details of such an event?

ABSOLUTELY NOT.



Does that help?

Click to expand...

I'm still not clear. Why do you call yourself a "partial" preterist? Do you believe Jesus returned in 70AD after being gone for 40 years? Do you believe the book of Revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel etc have been fulfilled?

Has the resurrection of the dead happened?
Has the kingdom been established?
Has Jesus cast Satan into the Lake of Fire?
Are we living in the new heaven and new earth spoken about in Revelation?

You know....all the stuff that prets believe. Do you believe it?

I think I understand what you're getting at.

You are leaving the possibility open that Jesus COULD do a myriad of other things in OUR future that the bible doesn't foretell and that those things could be considered "comings" of Jesus. RIght?

If that is what you're saying....I agree.

But I don't really consider that a partial preterist. I consider it a full preterist who won't put God in a box