No more Preterist talk

[NumberOneSon]

Perhaps I should start a new thread called "Why pretereists and futurists can have lunch together and enjoy each other's company"

Cool. I'll stop in for a bite to eat sometime.

In Christ,

Acts6:5

 

[Auntie]

Originally posted by DaveKerwin

There is an underlying irritation that I have, and this is it:

I think it's to our shame that we allow separations among us. It is to our shame that christianity has over 33,000 different denominations. And guess what.. no denomination has it right yet. We will never have it right. It is wrong that we allow petty differences to come between us and separate us. To be honest, it makes me sick. I hate that terms like futurist and preterist even exist. How about we call ourselves christians and that is it. Let's take our common denominator and focus on that, and throw out the rest of the crap. I don't care if you call youself a baptist, a catholic, or whatever else. I call myself a believer in Christ Jesus. If I ever claim to know God or scripture enough to separate myself from any of you, then please quote me and rebuke me, because I need to embrace your difference from me and focus on our common faith. There needs to be a line drawn here. We can only take separation so far. Satan loves to split us up, and here we sit letting him do it, as a matter of fact, we help him do it. To quote a band I like...
Who's gonna draw the line?? We're gonna draw the line! Who's gonna draw the line ???? We're gonna draw the line!!
Together! In any endevor! Forever and ever!

I like this quote also:
In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, and in all things charity.

Maybe it's time that we stop this separation and love on eachother. I`m sorry if I opened a can of worms in starting this thread, sometimes I am a little too frank in the way I say things. But I will not apologize for this post you are reading. Group hug

This is a really good post, Dave, and I agree with every word of what you have said.

But here is the problem: If you repeat those exact words to a Jehovah Witness standing at your front door, how would the Jehovah Witness respond to your words? Would they agree with you and shake your hand and leave? Maybe, but I doubt it. It's because the Jehovah Witness has an agenda--he is there to convert you. The Jehovah Witness is adamant in his doctrine, his only desire is to prove his doctrine is correct and yours is wrong. And he is very willing to go to great lengths to prove to you over and over how right he is, and how wrong you are. He will take the scriptures, one by one, and show you what the "real" meaning of each scripture is. And no matter how much you try to defend your own beliefs, he will have yet another scripture to throw at you. Eventually, you will realize it is a one-sided debate, because you each have different motives. You were motivated by brotherly love to listen to and consider his doctrine. His sole motivation was to convert you.

The preterists are here to convert us, plain and simple. I have enjoyed reading about preterism because I enjoy learning. But I do not appreciate anyone coming to Christian Forums with the sole motive to convert, because that attitude causes conflict, strife, separation, and discord.

As a side note, you say: "Satan loves to split us up". True words, my friend, except the preterists teach that Satan is dead, therefore they don't realize the truth of your words.

It's hard to find something in common with preterists, because they do not believe that the work of salvation was finished and completed at the Cross. Now watch, they will throw scriptures at this post, to "prove" that salvation was completed in 70AD. All I know is Christ suffered and died for me, he took my sins upon his body and suffered and died in my place. I accept and trust the shed blood of Jesus for my salvation--"It Is Finished". I can agree with any Christian denomination on this point at least. And if I were to witness to a lost soul, this is my witness, Christ died for us because He loves us. God forbid that I should wrap salvation around a particular eschatology.

 

[parousia70]

Aunti,
Just one (3 part) question:

If you believe it is finished, and salvation was completed on the cross, why does Jesus need to return?

If you believe He 'Finished' everything on the cross, how is it that you believe there is more left that He needs to accomplish?

If you consider Christianity "whole" without the return of Christ, whenever it is, why do you believe He needs to return at all?

Thanks

 

[jenlu]

Auntie,

If you're a Christian, I don't think there is any room for conversion...cause guess what...you're saved and a joint-heir of the Kingdom of God...Any preterist(which I am not yet, but I do see (understand) much of what they say) that says otherwise is full of it...

But for argument's sake...I wonder if I went through all your post's refuting preterism, if I would find any persuasion attempt's going on...also...

what if someone were write on this message board they didn't believe Mary was the mother of Jesus...What would you do...(perhaps)first you would ask them if they believed the Bible was the Word of God...Let's just say in this instance he/she were to say they did(for practicality in this situation since futurist's believe it is as well)...You would therefore quote them scripture...in an attempt to persuade...Then they would throw scripture out that they think would allow it not to be so...But it's in plain language that this is the case...so you continue to persuade by using other verses...

That's all these preterist's are doing...and they believe it is in plain language...now admitedly some are bit witty(in the annoying way), or down right rude sometimes(at least that's how it come's across and I can see it, and I'm probably guilty of it as well...)...but they are just trying to persuade...No one is saying anything about renouncing your belief that Jesus is the Son of God and that He is the Savior of the world...I take it as saying hey let's look at this from another angle...

Another point, if you look at any extremist factions of any eschatology point of view, you are gonna find things you disagree with adimately...my advice, don't converse with them...but the majority of proclaimed preterist's on this board are not like this, just vigourous and very studied on the subject...just trying to show their point of view in a very concise and scriptural way...

 

[davo]

Originally posted by DaveKerwin
Perhaps I should start a new thread called "Why pretereists and futurists can have lunch together and enjoy each other's company"

No doubt if we did we'd get along 'like-a-house-on-fire' With a plate, knife and fork in front of us, instead of a keyboard we'd be the best of mates!

davo

 

[Auntie]

Hello jenlu,

I was responding to Dave Kerwin's request that we all try and post more often about beliefs we share, beliefs we all have in common, rather than continually discuss our differences.

I don't think that's possible for a preterist. If a preterist makes a post concerning what beliefs we hold in common, that post is ultimately designed to use as proof of preterism. You have to consider a poster's motivation.


If I may requote:

"Originally posted by DaveKerwin

There is an underlying irritation that I have, and this is it:

I think it's to our shame that we allow separations among us. It is to our shame that christianity has over 33,000 different denominations. And guess what.. no denomination has it right yet. We will never have it right. It is wrong that we allow petty differences to come between us and separate us. To be honest, it makes me sick. I hate that terms like futurist and preterist even exist. How about we call ourselves christians and that is it. Let's take our common denominator and focus on that, and throw out the rest of the crap. I don't care if you call youself a baptist, a catholic, or whatever else. I call myself a believer in Christ Jesus. If I ever claim to know God or scripture enough to separate myself from any of you, then please quote me and rebuke me, because I need to embrace your difference from me and focus on our common faith. There needs to be a line drawn here. We can only take separation so far. Satan loves to split us up, and here we sit letting him do it, as a matter of fact, we help him do it."

 

[Ozarkpreterist]

Originally posted by Auntie_Belle_Um



It's hard to find something in common with preterists, because they do not believe that the work of salvation was finished and completed at the Cross. Now watch, they will throw scriptures at this post, to "prove" that salvation was completed in 70AD. All I know is Christ suffered and died for me, he took my sins upon his body and suffered and died in my place. I accept and trust the shed blood of Jesus for my salvation--"It Is Finished". I can agree with any Christian denomination on this point at least. And if I were to witness to a lost soul, this is my witness, Christ died for us because He loves us. God forbid that I should wrap salvation around a particular eschatology.

Auntie,

If we study the scriptures, we will see that God is a God who is in time yet He is also timeless or beyond time. You say that all things were accomplished at the cross, and you are correct. Yet, we see scriptures like these:

In Revelation 13:8 we see Jesus "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."

Or Ephesians 1:4 "Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love...."

And speaking of Jesus the Lamb of God Peter writes "He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was MANIFEST in these last time for you (I Peter 1:20)."

Therefore, from the perspective of the God Who is in time yet also before time and greater than time, when were all things accomplished? The answer is before time began.

The Bible is the story, revealing, or manifesting of the salvation that God accomplished before the foundation of the world. From God's perspective salvation was complete and full before the world began. Yet, from our perspective salvation is progressively revealed.

We see the progression of an already accomplished salvation in types and shadows in the Old Testament. One of the most beautiful is the feasts of Israel. There were seven feasts. Three of these were major feasts, Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles.

I suppose we could say all was accomplished when the Passover lamb was slain. Yet, if all things were manifest then, why did God institute two more major feasts of importance? Why not just stop there?

Let us apply this to the New Testament. If all things were manifest at the cross, why were the disciples told to wait for the day of Pentecost? Obviously, there was more to be revealed. Yet, there is a feast even beyond that-- Tabernacles. I believe this feast was fulfilled at the Parousia. There are some remarkable correlations between this feast and the events we see in Revelation 21 and 22. I hope to get everyone's ideas on these in a later post in the "How Preterism changes our Mindset" thread.

So, we see salvation is by all means a one time event. Yet, we also see that it is a progressive manifestation and consummation.

If you want further proof, read I Corinthians 15. You will see that there are many things left undone or yet to be manifest until the seconding coming. This is simply undeniable. You would have to make up your own very strange eschatology to say otherwise. We preterists just happen to believe that Jesus did not leave us hanging with a partial salvation for 2000 years. He completed all just on time and just as He said He would.

Come up a little higher Auntie, the view is great.

Ozark

 

[Caedmon]

Ozark, pardon me for interrupting, but I have a question.

How does the eventual death of our sun and the destruction of our solar system and Earth fit into preterism? Does preterism claim that the Earth will exist forever, or not?

 

[davo]

Originally posted by humblejoe
How does the eventual death of our sun and the destruction of our solar system and Earth fit into preterism? Does preterism claim that the Earth will exist forever, or not?

Hi Joe -actually the Word says [to which we agree] that our creation is everlasting. So as for "death and destruction" -that may be an assumption, as God is in total control, and He is:

"upholding all things by the word of His power" Heb 1:3
"and in Him all things hold together" Col 1:17

davo

 

[parousia70]

Originally posted by humblejoe
Ozark, pardon me for interrupting, but I have a question.

How does the eventual death of our sun and the destruction of our solar system and Earth fit into preterism? Does preterism claim that the Earth will exist forever, or not?

Joe,
The Bible, and therefore preterism, teaches that the that the Kingdom, and the generations of man, and the earth itself are all to continue "forever" (Ps.78:69; 104:5; 145:13; Eccl. 1:4; Dan. 4:3,34; 7:14,18,27; Lk. 1:33; Eph. 3:21).

As a Bible believing Christian, I must conclude it (the Bible) is correct on this issue.

P70

 

[Autumn]

Originally posted by parousia70
Aunti,
Just one (3 part) question:

If you believe it is finished, and salvation was completed on the cross, why does Jesus need to return?

If you believe He 'Finished' everything on the cross, how is it that you believe there is more left that He needs to accomplish?

If you consider Christianity "whole" without the return of Christ, whenever it is, why do you believe He needs to return at all?

Thanks

Sorry Parousia70, I just can't resist.
Everything has been complete through what Christ did, just everything has yet to be recognized.

18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God.

 

[davo]

Originally posted by Autumn
Sorry Parousia70, I just can't resist.
Everything has been complete through what Christ did, just everything has yet to be recognized.

Hi Autumn. I would say that I agree 100% with your statement -although probably from the other side of the fence

"Fulfilled Prophecy" is saying YES INDEED everything HAS been completed -Futurism however doesn't recognise it.

davo

 

[DaveKerwin]

Originally posted by parousia70

The Bible, and therefore preterism, teaches that...

Regardless of what follows this statement, it is made with the wrong approach. You are a fool if you say that you know for sure that your biblical interpretation is 100% correct. Because you are not 100% correct, you should not say for sure that preterism is Bible. This is the attitude that causes separation. Rather, you should say, I believe its true, or I think that it is true. After all, this is interpretation, and you are not infallible. Anytime you merge an imperfect person and an opinion, the only thing that you can get is an imperfect opinion. Consider speaking as if you could be imperfect.

 

[Caedmon]

Ok... I THINK that God exists.

 

[Didaskomenos]

Originally posted by DaveKerwin


Regardless of what follows this statement, it is made with the wrong approach. You are a fool if you say that you know for sure that your biblical interpretation is 100% correct. Because you are not 100% correct, you should not say for sure that preterism is Bible. This is the attitude that causes separation. Rather, you should say, I believe its true, or I think that it is true. After all, this is interpretation, and you are not infallible. Anytime you merge an imperfect person and an opinion, the only thing that you can get is an imperfect opinion. Consider speaking as if you could be imperfect.

I agree with you, Dave, on this. It's not only arrogant and presumptive, but is extremely effective in turning off a conversation, as it did with you, since you didn't even reply to what he said afterwards. For the record, this is the most pompous statement I've seen the preterists make - however, I won't let my preterist sympathies hold me back from criticizing that unfortunate remark.

humblejoe,

You can even go so far as to say that you're convinced and know that God exists. But saying "God says, and therefore I say" is tantamount to "I say, therefore God says." It begs the question of authority. There are better ways of making a decisive statement than this.

 

[GTX]

I don't believe in Preterism, I am waiting to bask in the Glory of Christs return!

 

[parousia70]

Originally posted by GTX
I don't believe in Preterism, I am waiting to bask in the Glory of Christs return!

I'm a preterist! I bask in Christs glory today and evermore, just like all Christians do, it's just that it seems many would rather believe it has been postponed.

I harken back to Proverbs 13:12
Hope deferred makes the heart sick, but desire fulfilled is a tree of life.

Heal your sick heart with the fulfilled reality!

 

[DaveKerwin]

Originally posted by humblejoe
Ok... I THINK that God exists.

you do not have empirical fact that God exists. you have faith. so you are correct in saying you think/believe that God exists. I don't see the problem with this

 

[DaveKerwin]

Originally posted by parousia70


I'm a preterist! I bask in Christs glory today and evermore, just like all Christians do, it's just that it seems many would rather believe it has been postponed.

I harken back to Proverbs 13:12
Hope deferred makes the heart sick, but desire fulfilled is a tree of life.

Heal your sick heart with the fulfilled reality!

You are awesome at ignoring what people say. Your responce to my post is saying that you are a preterist. Please re-read my post and reply to it.

 

[DaveKerwin]

Originally posted by Didaskomenos


I agree with you, Dave, on this. It's not only arrogant and presumptive, but is extremely effective in turning off a conversation, as it did with you, since you didn't even reply to what he said afterwards. For the record, this is the most pompous statement I've seen the preterists make - however, I won't let my preterist sympathies hold me back from criticizing that unfortunate remark.

humblejoe,

You can even go so far as to say that you're convinced and know that God exists. But saying "God says, and therefore I say" is tantamount to "I say, therefore God says." It begs the question of authority. There are better ways of making a decisive statement than this.

Thanks.

I like the second part of your post (tantamount, good word), you are right on.