Why Christians should reject Partial Preterism

[sovereigngrace]

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

To most orthodox Christians, Jesus defeated every enemy at the cross. To you everything happened in A.D.70 through Titus. BIG difference!!!

 

[mkgal1]

As per this forum:

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. The Second coming and the resurrection of the dead, however, have not yet occurred in the partial preterist system.

 

[sovereigngrace]

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?

I agree! He glorifies us and He glorifies the earth at the one and only future coming of Christ!

 

[sovereigngrace]

As per this forum:

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. The Second coming and the resurrection of the dead, however, have not yet occurred in the partial preterist system.

OK then, please answer these simple questions:

Jesus taught in the parable of the wheat and tares in Matthew 13:24-30, “The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, (1) Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but (2) gather the wheat into my barn.”

Verses 37-43 continues, “He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world (or aion or age); and the reapers are the angels. (1) As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world (or aion or age). The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. (2) Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.”

Is this past or future? What event does this refer to?

John 11:21-27 records: “Then said Martha unto Jesus, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee. Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again. Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.”

Is this past or future? What event does this refer to?

Christ had previously taught in John 6:39-44, 54, where He said, “And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day …No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day ... Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”

Is this past or future? What event does this refer to?

Christ tells us in John 12:48, “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.”

Is this past or future? What event does this refer to?

Romans 8:19-23: “For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption (phthora or decay) into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, [to wit], the redemption of our body.”

Is this past or future? What event does this refer to?

2 Peter 3:10-13 couldn't be clearer: “the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

Is this past or future? What event does this refer to?

Revelation 20:11-15, 21:1-5 tells us: “And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new.”

Is this past or future? What event does this refer to?

Revelation 22:3 tells us that the new heavens and new earth arrive “there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him.”

Is this past or future? What event does this refer to?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

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 fully agree. I am going to reword it.
Thanks

 

[Maria Billingsley]

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.

Some of those alive at that time would still be around to know of the destruction of the temple.
"Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."

 

[DavidPT]

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

Can you provide some things full Preterists believe, which you fully disagree with? I would think that should put this to rest once and for all. For the record I don't think you are a full Preterist. Yet some apparently think you are for some reason.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I fully agree. I am going to reword it.
Thanks

This reinforces what I have been saying. PPs do not seem to be able to think for themselves. What they espouse must be taught to them by others or approved by others before advocated. This negates the work of the Holy Spirit, and the Word of God.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

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

Correct! We are all partial Preterists to a degree!

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Can you provide some things full Preterists believe, which you fully disagree with? I would think that should put this to rest once and for all. For the record I don't think you are a full Preterist. Yet some apparently think you are for some reason.

The worst is Jesus Christ of Nazareth already came and we are living on the new earth. But his is also hyper Preterism where EVERYTHING is fulfilled. A rare view.

 

[DavidPT]

Some of those alive at that time would still be around to know of the destruction of the temple.
"Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."

In the verses surrounding the verse in question, the temple is not even mentioned one single time. But Jesus did speak of the temple in question though, but earlier on in the Discourse. If He was wanting to apply it to that period of time He would have said it earlier in the Discourse when He was actually talking about the temple in question, and not later in the Discourse when He was no longer talking about the temple in question.

 

[ewq1938]

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.

Right. When describing a certain generation you can refer to it as "this generation" as the one being described and not necessarily the generation of the time of the discourse. We also have to remember that not even Christ knew what generation he would return in so using language that can be understood in multiple ways is understandable.

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.

And not only did he say one generation would see all the events he described ending with the second coming but one more event with angels gathering the elect from all over.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

In the verses surrounding the verse in question, the temple is not even mentioned one single time. But Jesus did speak of the temple in question though, but earlier on in the Discourse. If He was wanting to apply it to that period of time He would have said it earlier in the Discourse when He was actually talking about the temple in question, and not later in the Discourse when He was no longer talking about the temple in question.

I am not sure why Jesus would switch from "this generation" to some future generation when He was specifically talking to His Disciples. But I do understand that we are all swayed by our theological system.

 

[ewq1938]

In the verses surrounding the verse in question, the temple is not even mentioned one single time. But Jesus did speak of the temple in question though, but earlier on in the Discourse.

Actually he mentioned the temple before the discourse, not during any part of it. The OD was spoken when Jesus sat on the Mt. Of Olives. The temple was mentioned earlier as he was leaving the temple and was walking towards the Mt. No part of the OD took place outside of the Mt of Olives nor when he was walking.

As you said, "the temple is not even mentioned one single time" and that is correct regarding the real OD.

 

[DavidPT]

We also have to remember that not even Christ knew what generation he would return in so using language that can be understood in multiple ways is understandable.

This is a brilliant argument IMO. Because in that same context He says exactly that---But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

 

[DavidPT]

Actually he mentioned the temple before the discourse, not during any part of it. The OD was spoken when Jesus sat on the Mt. Of Olives. The temple was mentioned earlier as he was leaving the temple and was walking towards the Mt. No part of the OD took place outside of the Mt of Olives nor when he was walking.

As you said, "the temple is not even mentioned one single time" and that is correct regarding the real OD.

In my view the temple in the first century has zero to do with an abomination of desolation. So when He was speaking of the temple in question, I was meaning what you are referring to above. Whether that was part of the Discourse or not, I guess that's debatable.

 

[ewq1938]

I am not sure why Jesus would switch from "this generation" to some future generation when He was specifically talking to His Disciples.

There was no switch. It was always about the generation that would see everything including the visible second coming and angelic gathering of the elect. As I said, even Christ didn't know which generation he would return in so he simply talked about what things that generation would witness and these things haven't happened yet.

 

[ebedmelech]

Your form of Partial Preterism is only a thin paper wall away from Full Preterism. It is far from balanced. To say the following is balanced is erroneous and absurd, and a misrepresentation of scriptural truth.

• 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.

You're really failing to understand partial preterist don't all view these things the way you describe. That's all I'll say on that. Many of the things you cite above are views of full preterism.

 

[mkgal1]

Can you provide some things full Preterists believe, which you fully disagree with? I would think that should put this to rest once and for all. For the record I don't think you are a full Preterist. Yet some apparently think you are for some reason.

The qualifying factor is that to be considered "full" preterism one would believe ALL prophecy has been fulfilled - that nothing is left for the future (no physical resurrection - no future return of Christ).

You'd think that'd "put this to rest" but I've been posting this almost daily for about a year now (against SG's accusations that I'm a full preterist pretending to be a partial preterist). Yet - there continues to be persistent accusations.

I always appreciate your repectful attitude, David. Others can learn from your way of disagreeing and discussing with respect and kindness.

 

[sovereigngrace]

You're really failing to understand partial preterist don't all view these things the way you describe. That's all I'll say on that. Many of the things you cite above are views of full preterism.

mkgal and others have confirmed these. Please let me know where you feel I’m wrong.