Why Christians should reject Partial Preterism

[DavidPT]

They don't imply a "return to earth" as Jesus spoke those words while He was on Earth - in human flesh already.

I fail to understand this argument. Clearly He would be physically leaving the earth after having said that, and that He did physically leave the earth eventually. But that's not the end of the story though. He is yet to physically return.

Acts 1:9 explains the leaving. Daniel 7:13-14---and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him---explains the part about sitting on the right hand of power(Mark 14:62). And Matthew 24:30---and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory---which is referring to the 2nd advent, explains the part about coming in the clouds of heaven(Mark 14:62).


Via some of these interpretations of the Discourse, some of you paint a picture that there is only one physical advent of Christ rather than two physical advents of Christ. Those such as myself see the Discourse involving the ascension up until the 2nd coming, and what follows the 2nd coming. Obviously, in order for there to be an ascension that has to be a first advent first, and that there was. Yet the Discourse does not speak of a time when Christ is still physically dwelling on the earth in the first century among them. It is speaking of a time when He is not physically dwelling among them, meaning during the ascension. But that changes eventually, meaning the 2nd advent, as in Matthew 24:30 for one.

As to His ascension, clearly that is not limited to just the first century up until 70 AD. The ascension is still ongoing as we speak. Therefore the Discourse involves at least 2000 years. IOW, however long the ascension lasts, that is the same amount of time the Discourse has in view, meaning from the beginning of the ascension up until the 2nd advent, the end of the ascension.

 

[sovereigngrace]

"Obsessed with 70AD" doesn't apply to me - but maybe the shoe fits on you, because your beliefs seem to bring you to a place of zeal against those that see great significance of the wholesale removal of the complete ancient Jewish religious system and transfer of the levitical priesthood to Christ as our eternal High Priest. How can that "point people away" from Christ? Are you just upset because this "points people away" from your videos you've made?

LOL. What videos that I have made?

 

[Lost4words]

Christians are not meant to be clones or robots. They are meant to search out the Word of God for themselves. If Preterists did that, they would quickly come to see that what they have been taught and what the Scriptures say or two different things.

You should always have an answer for what you believe.

Why?

· You need to know what you believe. You need a solid foundation on which to build your life.
· You need to be able to defend what the Book says. After all, every truth in this book is under attack today.
· You need to be able to help others, by relaying the truth to them.

Acts 17:10-11 says, “And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”

I have searched and researched partial preterism. For myself. For me, the Word of God points to those truths. Obviously you cannot see that.

God bless you

 

[DavidPT]

While it's on my mind, can Preterists, meaning those who see the Discourse only involving first century events, remind me what events they take the coming in Matthew 24:39 to be referring to? Can they also remind me whether they take it to be referring to the same coming in Matthew 24:30 or not? And can they also remind me what events they take the tribulation of those days in Matthew 24:29 to be referring to? Depending on the answers, I may or may not have proof they are contradicting the texts involved.

Since no one has taken this on as of yet, I'm just going have to go with what I assume Preterists take these to be referring to, right or wrong.

what events they take the coming in Matthew 24:39 to be referring to? I assume they take that to mean events having to do with 70 AD.

whether they take it to be referring to the same coming in Matthew 24:30 or not? I assume they do.

what events they take the tribulation of those days in Matthew 24:29 to be referring to? I assume they take that to mean events having to do with 70 AD.


Assuming I am correct to conclude this about their position, in that case, they are clearly contradicting the texts involved.


If the coming in Matthew 24:39 is meaning events having to do with 70 AD, and that so is the tribulation of those days in Matthew 24:29, and that the coming in Matthew 24:30 is referring to these same events, well that would be impossible according to the texts involved. Clearly Matthew 24:29 proves the coming in Matthew 24:30 is not during nor before the trib of those days, but is instead after the trib of those days. And if the coming in Matthew 24:39 is this same coming in Matthew 24:30, obviously then, that makes that coming after the trib of those days as well.

 

[mkgal1]

Like you, Hymenaeus and Philetus argued that the resurrection had already occurred

They were saying this in the transition time between the Old priesthood and its complete destruction and removal. That's what I understand was causing confusion - people were turning back to the old religious system and abandoning faith in Christ.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

• They have the old covenant ending in AD70.

• They have the new covenant commencing in AD70.

• They have “this age” ending in AD70.

• They have “the age to come” starting in AD70.

• They have “the last days” finishing in AD70.

• They have “the last day” of “the last days” occurring in AD70.

• They have “the day of redemption” happening in AD70.

• They have “the coming of the Lord” arriving in AD70.

• They have “the resurrection” of the just and the unjust happening in AD70.

• They have “the judgment” of the just and the unjust happening in AD70.

• They have the old corrupt heavens and earth being replaced in AD70.

• They have “the new heavens and new earth” appearing in AD70.

I would like to correct and comment on your list of partial Preterist claims.

• They have the old covenant ending in AD70.
• The Old Covenant ended when the veil was torn in two, at the time of Christ death.
• They have the new covenant commencing in AD70.
• The New Covenant was established when the veil was torn in two, at the time of Christs death. AD 70 made the Temple desolate so that the Old Covenant could not be performed anymore. The Gospel needed to be spread before the destruction took place. This is known as the time of the Gentiles.
• They have “this age” ending in AD70.
• Yes, as "this age" was known as the Old Covenant. Ended at the time of Christs death and its purpose destroyed and made desolate in AD 70.
• They have “the age to come” starting in AD70.
• Started at the time of Christ death and completed on the Day of Pentecost. We now live in this age.
• They have “the last days” finishing in AD70
• According to Matthew, Jesus said it would happen in their generation.
• They have “the last day” of “the last days” occurring in AD70.
• The last day of the Old Covenant, not the last day of the world.
• They have “the day of redemption” happening in AD70.
• Jesus did this for us on the cross the day of His death.
• They have “the coming of the Lord” arriving in AD70.
• Yes. He came in wrath. This is not to be confused with His second coming for the Saints and the end of time.
• They have “the resurrection” of the just and the unjust happening in AD70.
• This is hyper full Preterism.
• They have “the judgment” of the just and the unjust happening in AD70.
• This is hyper full Preterism.
• They have the old corrupt heavens and earth being replaced in AD70.
  
• This is hyper full Preterism
• They have “the new heavens and new earth” appearing in AD70.
• This is hyper full Preterism.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I have searched and researched partial preterism. For myself. For me, the Word of God points to those truths. Obviously you cannot see that.

God bless you

Well then, please directly address the detail of the Op. These web "experts" cannot do!

 

[mkgal1]

• They have “the coming of the Lord” arriving in AD70.

• This is full Preterism

Actually, it's not limited to a Full Preterist view. I'm a partial preterist - I believe in a still future coming of Christ and future resurrection - but I also believe Christ Jesus "came with the clouds in glory and in power" at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That's not a coming to earth.

I'm grateful this forum recognizes that perspective as Orthodox partial preterism (not all pp agree on that - as there are varying degrees of belief in fulfillment).

 

[DavidPT]

According to Matthew, Jesus said it would happen in their generation.

If context counts for anything, in context He clearly was not meaning during the lives of those alive at the time. It clearly matters where He said that in the Discourse. He did not say that in first century context. If He was wanting to apply it to the first century, He would have said it in a context involving 1st century events and not in a context involving the 2nd coming instead.

 

[mkgal1]

• They have the old corrupt heavens and earth being replaced in AD70.

• This is hyper full Preterism

This is still Orthodox partial preterism (but the meaning of "heaven and Earth" isn't our globe).

 

[sovereigngrace]

They were saying this in the transition time between the Old priesthood and its complete destruction and removal. That's what I understand was causing confusion - people were turning back to the old religious system and abandoning faith in Christ.

Not at all! The new covenant with a new priesthood had removed the old covenant with the old priesthood. That happened when the curtain tore in two.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Actually, it's not limited to a Full Preterist view. I'm a partial preterist - I believe in a still future coming of Christ and future resurrection - but I also believe Christ Jesus "came with the clouds in glory and in power" at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That's not a coming to earth.

I'm grateful this forum recognizes that perspective as Orthodox partial preterism (not all pp agree on that - as there are varying degrees of belief in fulfillment).

I knew your views were Full Preterist!

 

[sovereigngrace]

This is still Orthodox partial preterism (but the meaning of "heaven and Earth" isn't our globe).

I really knew your views were Full Preterist!

 

[mkgal1]

Not at all! The new covenant with a new priesthood had removed the old covenant with the old priesthood. That happened when the curtain tore in two.

You deny there was a threat of Judaizers turning people away from the faith in Christ after Christ's ascencion to heaven, but before 70 AD?

 

[mkgal1]

I really knew your views were Full Preterist!

Those aren't full preterist beliefs. As much as you've been trying to prove over this past year (2019 included).

 

[sovereigngrace]

I would like to correct and comment on your list of partial Preterist claims.

• They have the old covenant ending in AD70.
• The Old Covenant ended when the veil was torn in two, at the time of Christ death.
• They have the new covenant commencing in AD70.
• The New Covenant was established when the veil was torn in two, at the time of Christs death. AD 70 made the Temple desolate so that the Old Covenant could not be performed anymore. The Gospel needed to be spread before the destruction took place. This is known as the time of the Gentiles.
• They have “this age” ending in AD70.
• Yes, as "this age" was known as the Old Covenant. Ended at the time of Christs death and its purpose destroyed and made desolate in AD 70.
• They have “the age to come” starting in AD70.
• Started at the time of Christ death and completed on the Day of Pentecost. We now live in this age.
• They have “the last days” finishing in AD70
• According to Matthew, Jesus said it would happen in their generation.
• They have “the last day” of “the last days” occurring in AD70.
• The last day of the Old Covenant, not the last day of the world.
• They have “the day of redemption” happening in AD70.
• Jesus did this for us on the cross the day of His death.
• They have “the coming of the Lord” arriving in AD70.
• This is full Preterism
• They have “the resurrection” of the just and the unjust happening in AD70.
• This is hyper full Preterism.
• They have “the judgment” of the just and the unjust happening in AD70.
• This is hyper full Preterism.
• They have the old corrupt heavens and earth being replaced in AD70.
  
• This is hyper full Preterism
• They have “the new heavens and new earth” appearing in AD70.
• This is hyper full Preterism.

I can accept this type of Partial Preterism. mkgal1 has obviously been misrepresenting Partial Preterism to me.

 

[mkgal1]

I can accept this type of Partial Preterism. mkgal1 has obviously been misrepresenting Partial Preterism to me.

No, as I said, there are different degrees. This forum has it defined properly.

 

[sovereigngrace]

You deny there was a threat of Judaizers turning people away from the faith in Christ after Christ's ascencion to heaven, but before 70 AD?

Who cares! They were blind leaders of the blind. Their system was abolished at the cross. The fact that they did not get it does not mean anything.

Hebrews 7:27 says of Christ and His final atonement, “Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.”

Hebrews 9:28 explains that "Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many.”

Hebrews 10:10 says, “we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”

Hebrews 10:12 says, “this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God.”

Hebrews 10:14 says, “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.”

Romans 6:10 says, “he died unto sin once.”

1 Peter 3:18 says, “For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.”

Hebrews 9:12 explains, “by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.”

Christ put and end of sin by this final transaction for sin, thus making an end of sin forever for those who would believe. There will never again be a sacrifice for sin. Christ’s atonement satisfied heaven’s holy demands and ensured that there would never again be another sacrifice/offering for sin carrying God’s blessing.

 

[mkgal1]

Who cares! They were blind leaders of the blind. Their system was abolished at the cross. The fact that they did not get it does not mean anything.

It matters to me that Jesus claimed He'd be taking their power away - and He did (quite effectively).

 

[DavidPT]

but I also believe Christ Jesus "came with the clouds in glory and in power" at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That's not a coming to earth.

So you see the destruction of Jerusalem and the killing of millions of Jews at the time, as a glorious event? I would think Christ coming in glory might actually involve something glorious instead, such as the following, as an example.

2 Thessalonians 1:10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

Surely you don't apply that to 70 AD events, do you?