Preterism, both full & partial, are false.

[parousia70]

• Partial Preterism: Partial preterism holds that most eschatological prophecies, such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the Antichrists, the Great Tribulation, and the advent of the Day of the Lord as a "judgment-coming" of Christ, were fulfilled either in AD 70 or during the persecution of Christians under the Emperor Nero.

Thanks for reminding our readers that it's perfectly within forum rules to profess "Christ came in 70 AD", as most preterists (partial or full) affirm.

Only views EXCLUSIVE to FULL preterism are prohibited. And the onus is on the reporter/moderator/administrator to demonstrate a particular espoused view is exclusively FP in nature.
I wouldn't want that job, as it is nearly impossible to parse.

For example, all Full preterists believe and affirm Jesus was born of a virgin, died on the cross, was raised back to life and ascended into heaven. IF the forum were to take the stand than NO views held by full preterists could be espoused, it wold effectively ban such affirmations...

Thankfully the forum is run by sober, thoughtful, intelligent people who know the difference, even if many of it's members do not.

 

[Bob_1000]

Thanks for reminding our readers that it's perfectly within forum rules to profess "Christ came in 70 AD", as most preterists (partial or full) affirm.

Only views EXCLUSIVE to FULL preterism are prohibited. And the onus is on the reporter/moderator/administrator to demonstrate a particular espoused view is exclusively FP in nature.
I wouldn't want that job, as it is nearly impossible to parse.

For example, all Full preterists believe and affirm Jesus was born of a virgin, died on the cross, was raised back to life and ascended into heaven. IF the forum were to take the stand than NO views held by full preterists could be espoused, it wold effectively ban such affirmations...

Thankfully the forum is run by sober, thoughtful, intelligent people who know the difference, even if many of it's members do not.

What in full preterism is not allowed here?

 

[parousia70]

What in full preterism is not allowed here?

You can't deny this passage of the Nicene Creed, as full preterists do:
"He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end"

As far as I can tell, as long as you hold this passage of the creed to be true and correct, You're good to go with as much preterism as you can muster here.

Interestingly, the forum rules do allow considerable "wiggle room" in one's interpretation of other passages in the creed, but not on this passage.

 

[Gundy22]

"Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again."

From Methodist liturgy - a full preterist would not adhere to that.

 

[Bob_1000]

You can't deny this passage of the Nicene Creed, as full preterists do:
"He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end"

As far as I can tell, as long as you hold this passage of the creed to be true and correct, You're good to go with as much preterism as you can muster here.

Interestingly, the forum rules do allow considerable "wiggle room" in one's interpretation of other passages in the creed, but not on this passage.

So would he already came in glory and judgement and that judgement continues as people die be acceptable in your opinion?

 

[parousia70]

So would he already came in glory and judgement and that judgement continues as people die be acceptable in your opinion?

I would say, at first blush, It does not qualify for acceptance within the forum rules, since the Creedal passage states: "He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead".

I think one would be hardpressed to successfully argue to the staff here that that view falls within that scope. But one could sure try.

 

[Bob_1000]

I would say, at first blush, It does not qualify for acceptance within the forum rules, since the Creedal passage states: "He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead".

I think one would be hardpressed to argue that view falls within that scope. But one could sure try.

What a shame that people can’t speak freely about what the Bible says. Thanks for the info.

 

[keras]

What a shame that people can’t speak freely about what the Bible says. Thanks for the info.

What the Bible actually says, is not the problem.
It is the belief that plainly stated and quite feasible events like the cosmic signs prophesied; have happened. When there is not a smidgen of proof in the historical record of any of them.

Worse still is the idea that Jesus Returned in 70 AD and He rules and reigns over the world now. This unbelievable idea makes Jesus to be a very weak and ineffectual King indeed!

I have said before and say again; preterism is just a way of avoiding the thought that they might actually have to face dramatic and frightening events themselves.

 

[Bob_1000]

What the Bible actually says, is not the problem.
It is the belief that plainly stated and quite feasible events like the cosmic signs prophesied; have happened. When there is not a smidgen of proof in the historical record of any of them.

Worse still is the idea that Jesus Returned in 70 AD and He rules and reigns over the world now. This unbelievable idea makes Jesus to be a very weak and ineffectual King indeed!

I have said before and say again; preterism is just a way of avoiding the thought that they might actually have to face dramatic and frightening events themselves.

Do you think Jesus is in heaven wringing his hands in despair over the crisis were in right now or do you think he sent it?

 

[parousia70]

What a shame that people can’t speak freely about what the Bible says. Thanks for the info.

Well there is a section here where full preterists are free to espouse their views:
Controversial Christian Theology

You just can’t post them on this section, similar to how you can’t post against Catholicism in the Catholic section.

 

[parousia70]

I have said before and say again; preterism is just a way of avoiding the thought that they might actually have to face dramatic and frightening events themselves.

That’s just plain false. Preterists are perfectly prepared to face any dramatic and frightening event that may befall them In Their lives.

Preterists know in their lives they will have tribulation.

Preterists know they will one day draw their last breath, perhaps even at the culmination of an unimaginable suffering, and they will be held to account by their maker.

It seems to me futurists are the ones fearful of tribulation, hoping to avoid it by getting raptured away or somehow prevented from having to experience it themselves.

Preterists, in contrast, fear nothing that may befall us in this life, for we know our victory has already been won.

 

[Timtofly]

Prove to whom?

The second temple lasted for a total of 585 years (516 BCE to c. 70 CE). Herod the Great made a large reconstruction, yes. I am not sure what you mean by him being killed by God.


You are probably the only person I have ever met with the opinion that the second temple was not the temple of God. All people in the era (Jesus and apostles included) talked and behaved in the way like it was. So the burden of proof is perhaps on you.

Pretty sure Jesus ended the point at the death of Zacharias on the alter. God then rent the veil from top to bottom at the Cross. Can you point to the date Zacharias was killed? That would have been the last time God recognized any authority who actually represented Him in this temple.

I would say that authority landed upon John the Baptist. Then when Christ was baptized it was passed to the church. If you really want to get technical about it.

 

[Timtofly]

There cannot be the real third temple, its theologically impossible in the Christian era. So this view does not make sense. The destruction was final and the theology has changed significantly and forever.

It will not be built in a Christian era as you put it. The Second Coming is the end of the church. It will be Christ in His temple at that point.

The 1000 years is not a Christian era either. No one gets "saved" during the Millennium. Any who rebel will face instant Death.

Theology will again change drastically at the Second Coming. Why would it not, now Christ is physically seen by all on the earth? Spiritual blindness is also gone. All will see the GWT and the face as well as the whole image in all of God's glory. It will no longer be by faith, but sight, and many will still be decieved and accept the lies of Satan.

The Preterist view of the 70AD event is too narrow in scope and effects. Nothing as Revelation states, happened in 70AD. Just some contrived historical facts from the OT that seem similar. Josephus gave us historical points about both the OT and the 70AD event. Josephus quoted Jesus and the OD, but not Revelation. He is the source many rely on for their facts.

 

[Timtofly]

I would say, at first blush, It does not qualify for acceptance within the forum rules, since the Creedal passage states: "He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead".

I think one would be hardpressed to successfully argue to the staff here that that view falls within that scope. But one could sure try.

This means only amil are allowed. What dead are judged at the Second Coming? That is at the GWT.

 

[keras]

Preterists are perfectly prepared to face any dramatic and frightening event that may befall them In Their lives.

Is just a shame that preterists refuse to recognize the Prophesies that tell us in great detail, what God has planned for our future.
Being forewarned, is to be forearmed.

 

[trophy33]

I have said before and say again; preterism is just a way of avoiding the thought that they might actually have to face dramatic and frightening events themselves.

Being forewarned, is to be forearmed.

You think that only futurists can face dramatic events?

Christians have been suffering under various dictators and tyrants. Imagine Jews, Romans, islam, communism, nazism... your futurism would not help you a bit in these real life events.

If the only dramatic events you can imagine in isolated New Zealand is some end-times futurist Antichrist, then read more about what was happening in Europe to Christians only few decades ago. And centuries ago. And basically for all the history.

 

[trophy33]

It will not be built in a Christian era as you put it. The Second Coming is the end of the church. It will be Christ in His temple at that point.

The 1000 years is not a Christian era either. No one gets "saved" during the Millennium. Any who rebel will face instant Death.

Theology will again change drastically at the Second Coming. Why would it not, now Christ is physically seen by all on the earth? Spiritual blindness is also gone. All will see the GWT and the face as well as the whole image in all of God's glory. It will no longer be by faith, but sight, and many will still be decieved and accept the lies of Satan.

The Preterist view of the 70AD event is too narrow in scope and effects. Nothing as Revelation states, happened in 70AD. Just some contrived historical facts from the OT that seem similar. Josephus gave us historical points about both the OT and the 70AD event. Josephus quoted Jesus and the OD, but not Revelation. He is the source many rely on for their facts.

This is so called dispensationalism. A view of history developed by Darby in 19th century and spread mostly in the American protestantism.

I do not think this system is what the New Testament teaches so I do not believe the points you postulated.

 

[trophy33]

Can you point to the date Zacharias was killed?

Sometime in the 8th century before Christ.

I do not think it has something with the legality of the second temple.

 

[parousia70]

What dead are judged at the Second Coming? That is at the GWT.

(1) The resurrection occurs at the coming of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:23)

(2) The judgment occurs at the coming of Christ (2 Timothy 4:1; Revelation 11:15-18)

(3) The "New Heavens/Earth" occurs at the coming of Christ -- i.e., the "thief's coming," the "day of the Lord" (2 Peter 3:10/1 Thessalonians 5:2)

These key eschatological events all occur at the precise moment of the coming of Jesus Christ. THEREFORE, as the apostles themselves understood, there is no literal, historic millennium separating them.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Worse still is the idea that Jesus Returned in 70 AD and He rules and reigns over the world now. This unbelievable idea makes Jesus to be a very weak and ineffectual King indeed!

Jesus rules "in the MIDST of His enemies". Meaning He has allowed those enemies to exist. In mercy to them. Try not to confuse Christ's ongoing reign offering mercy to His enemies (giving them a season to repent, so that they are without excuse) with His being a "weak and ineffectual" King.

God never intended to zap the world into complete holiness instantaneously. He works incrementally, and often behind the scenes. But that increase of His kingdom is just as inexorable as the growth of leaven in bread dough. Though you cannot see it, the effects of the leaven of Christ's kingdom are working bit by bit to accomplish God's purposes. God's long-suffering patience with us astounds me. Which is not to say He will forever delay His judgments.