Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

Is Partial Preterism a New Perspective?

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$905.00
Goal
$1,038.00
Stormcrow, I certainly never specifically said Preterism was "a cult". I don't believe I've ever used the term "cult" before. However, my point was that Preterism and Futurism are essentially alternate takes on eschatology. The degree of certainty expressed about such things amazes me. My certainty involves only the existence of God and His loving and accepting character. Everything else is scholarship, hermeneutics, science and probabilities.

To quickly sum up what I was attempting to show is that - Christ "Is, Was and Will Be." It is neither preterist in character, nor is it dispensationalist or futurist. A dispensationalist, futurist, or a preterist knows only one third of who Christ is. So neither knows the fullness of Christ:

"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty" (Revelation 1:8)

"I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hades and of death." (Revelation 1:18)

These verses in Revelation agree with Christ's statement that His words would "never pass away".

"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matthew 24:35)

The Spirit of Christ's Words "the time is at hand," IS in EVERY generation. Christ said; "the words that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT, and THEY ARE LIFE." If you cannot see that that is true in every generation then you will not see the dangers of emphasizing either preterism, futurism, or dispensationalism. To emphasize the past, is to miss the IS. To emphasize the future is to miss the IS. All Christendom does one or the other. If you see this as classifying Preterism as "a cult" there is nothing I can do about it - but at least in my own mind, that was not my intention.
 
I don't speak "doctrine". I have supported everything I've written with Christ's words and those of His apostles. And you started this sub-thread with your characterization of preterism in your very first post, which I called you on.
If you want a one-on-one "scriptural" discussion concerning when the Second Coming is, I will be happy to oblige you, on certain conditions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Christ "Is, Was and Will Be." It is neither preterist in character, nor is it dispensationalist or futurist. A dispensationalist, futurist, or a preterist knows only one third of who Christ is. So neither knows the fullness of Christ.

I disagree with that characterization. Preterism, futurism, and even dispensationalism are merely hermeneutic frameworks for interpreting and understanding apostolic eschatology. Obviously, I believe preterism is the only correct interpretive framework for understanding apostolic eschatology, but understanding apostolic eschatology is not a requirement for salvation. Saving knowledge of Christ is all that's required for salvation.
 
You claim I have been dishonest to shield your ignorance. If you want a one-on-one "scriptural" discussion concerning when the Second Coming is, I will be happy to oblige you, on certain conditions.

You posted an anti-preterist screed in a sub-forum dedicated to preterism. Knowing people would call you on your prevarications, why would you bother to do that unless you just wanted to create ill-will here?

There's more than enough scripture to discuss in open forum if you were interested in discussing it. Why not address the words of Christ and the apostles instead of calling preterists "cultists" and "heretics", especially when there is not one shred of evidence to support your inflammatory language?

Your agenda is apparent for all to see.
 
LOL.

I hope you understand me anyway.

I have let you know that your view was condemned by the Councils. That's a fact. You affront me for speaking the truth. If you were more educated you would already have known this and you would not have been so easily disturbed by what should be well known to any educated person on the church history. How can you claim to be educated when you know nothing about church history?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LOL.

I hope you understand me anyway.

Yes. Very well.

I have let you know that your view was condemned by the Councils. That's a fact.

Again, you have repeatedly alleged preterism wasn't invented until the 16th century. The councils you allege condemned it happened in the 4th century. And, as has been pointed out to you repeatedly, both of those statements cannot be true. So yes, you prevaricate. Often.

You affront me for speaking the truth.

All I see are insults. Lots and lots of insults, as cited below.

If you were more educated you would already have known this and you would not have been so easily disturbed by what should be well known to any educated person on the church history. How can you claim to be educated when you know nothing about church history?

Feel free to lock this thread, Reba. Tired of the trash talk. I'm out.
 
I believe some degree of Preterism (partial preterism) has been the dominant view of the church for the last 2000 years. Although, it has been eclipsed in the 20th century with Dispensationalism, especially in fundamentalist protestant churches.
 
I believe some degree of Preterism (partial preterism) has been the dominant view of the church for the last 2000 years. Although, it has been eclipsed in the 20th century with Dispensationalism, especially in fundamentalist protestant churches.

When you get right down to it, there is not a single Christian alive who doesn't need to believe that most prophecy has been fulfilled at the cross. Were that not the case, our salvation is not assured.

We are all "preterists" to varying degrees.
 
Unlike Preterism, which denies the second coming of Jesus; Partial Preterism holds that the …“Second coming and the resurrection of the dead …have not yet occurred.” (Wikipedia)


Preterism does not deny the Second Coming of Jesus. It simply states that He did come, keeping His Promise and it is disingenuous for anyone to state that Preterism denies the Second Coming, just because it doesn't say that it's all about us, today, a view which I personally see as vain and egotistical.

As for Partial Preterism, I don't see how there is any such thing. The word "preterism" comes from the Latin word "praeter", which means "past", or "in the past". So how can any view which says that things are yet future, be "preterist"?

Partial Preterism is an oxymoron. A self-contradiction. And that isn't me speaking, trying to attack it. It's the dictionary definition saying so.

My stating this is no different than if someone tried to say they are "Wiccan Christian". You either are a Christian, or you are not. You cannot state that you believe in practicing Wicca as well and claim to be a Christian. A "Wiccan Christian" would be an oxymoron; a self-contradiction, would it not?

And before you tell me that I'm using a ridiculous example and so it doesn't compare (if you were going to do that), you need to understand that there *are* people out there who claim to be both! Although they will usually use the term, "Christian Witch", or what I said, but in reverse; "Christian Wiccan".

The point is, that just as "Christian Wiccan" is an oxymoron, because they are opposite views, so is "Partial Preterism", because someone's view being "praeter", means that they view things as being in the past.

IMO, there is no such thing and rather, it is "Mild Futurism", since it views events as yet to come. And it isn't just the minor events, but the most important ones!

Hope this helped. :)
 
I have claimed this same thing in the past only to be strongly reprimanded by partial preterists. I fully agree with you.

Well, they can get as upset as they want. All that shows is that they know that their argument holds no water. They get upset, because they know it's not us that they're arguing with. It's the dictionary. And that won't change, to suit their doctrine. And that is what upsets them.
 
Partial Preterism is an oxymoron. A self-contradiction. And that isn't me speaking, trying to attack it. It's the dictionary definition saying so.

My stating this is no different than if someone tried to say they are "Wiccan Christian". You either are a Christian, or you are not.

:biglol

Ignoring the gratuitously insulting nonsense of comparing preterists to witches, your claim partial-preterism is an oxymoron is moronic nonsense. A preterist doesn't claim the same thing is both past and present (unless some sort of double fulfillment is being suggested). A partial-preterist might claim some things are past and something other is future. It's no different from you claiming that Jesus came once in the first century die for our sins and is coming again in the future to rapture of the saboteurs of the church who are trying to force Jesus to return by trashing both the middle-east and the church with their dispensationalist eschatology.
 
For the sake of discussion the terms preterist and partial (orthodox) preterist are difined on this forum as follows....in extremely simple terms we do not wish to put word in any one's posting...

preterist view.... holds Christ returned 70 AD

partial (orthodox) preterist ....await His return....

To have any discussion some form of common ground needs to be laid out..... Please accept this as a aid to discussion
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please read the ToS. The link is posted for you....Please note 2.5. If you were on the receiving end of your post would think it to be personal?

http://www.christianforums.net/announcement.php?f=64&a=6

2.5: Respect each others' opinions. Address issues, not persons or personalities. Give other members the respect you would want them to give yourself.

I am reading what looks to me to be heading to personal please remember the TOS....reba
 
:biglol

Ignoring the gratuitously insulting nonsense of comparing preterists to witches, your claim partial-preterism is an oxymoron is moronic nonsense. A preterist doesn't claim the same thing is both past and present (unless some sort of double fulfillment is being suggested). A partial-preterist might claim some things are past and something other is future. It's no different from you claiming that Jesus came once in the first century die for our sins and is coming again in the future to rapture of the saboteurs of the church who are trying to force Jesus to return by trashing both the middle-east and the church with their dispensationalist eschatology.

First of all, I did not compare Partial Preterists to witches. I compared what I see as oxymorons, using an example that people have probably heard.

Secondly, I find your comment insulting. And calling what I said "moronic nonsense" is a personal insult. I think there's better ways to discuss something than that.

Thirdly, I simply stated what the word means. If that bothers you and you can't accept it, then your argument is with the dictionary, not me. The dictionary isn't going to change to please you and I'm not going to say that the word means something else, just because it's what you like to hear. Facts are facts. You can deny they exist, but they still will anyway. :)
 
Again, you have repeatedly alleged preterism wasn't invented until the 16th century.

A common accusation. That it was invented by a Catholic monk in the 16th century. It isn't true though and this accusation is easily refuted.
 
Please read the ToS. The link is posted for you....Please note 2.5. If you were on the receiving end of your post would think it to be personal?

http://www.christianforums.net/announcement.php?f=64&a=6

2.5: Respect each others' opinions. Address issues, not persons or personalities. Give other members the respect you would want them to give yourself.

I am reading what looks to me to be heading to personal please remember the TOS....reba

Reba, I certainly do not mean to tell you how to moderate, but your post did not make something clear and I am hoping that you will please clarify it for us.

You said, "This post is for you". Who was the "you"? You didn't say. Or did you mean "you" in general? Like "whomever".

Thanks.
 
First of all, I did not compare Partial Preterists to witches. I compared what I see as oxymorons, using an example that people have probably heard.

You said, "Partial Preterism is an oxymoron... this is no different than if someone tried to say they are 'Wiccan Christian'. You either are a Christian, or you are not." That comes pretty close to a witch being an analogy to partial preterist.

Secondly, I find your comment insulting. And calling what I said "moronic nonsense" is a personal insult. I think there's better ways to discuss something than that.

That's a play on words oxymoron vs. moronic.

It is nonsense to claim partial preterism is an oxymoron. It's not a contradiction to believe that some things are in the past and some things are in the future. Or, do you believe that you have no future?
 
Back
Top