What's new
By:
Filters
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.

    Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.

  • 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."

    Read The Gospel Online.

The IMPOSSIBLE THREAD ON partial PRETERISM !!

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$1,038.00
Goal
$1,038.00
Donate View
JLB said:
Again, the events of 70 AD are not mentioned in the Olivet Discourse.


Preterism is built upon a gross misunderstanding of scripture. Jesus was referring to Zechariah and the army that will be surrounding Jerusalem at the time when the Lord returns with His saints from heaven, and the resurrection/rapture, and not the events of 70 AD.
Click to expand...

JLB said:
Preterism is built upon a gross misunderstanding of scripture. Jesus was referring to Zechariah and the army that will be surrounding Jerusalem at the time when the Lord returns with His saints from heaven, and the resurrection/rapture, and not the events of 70 AD.
Click to expand...

JLB said:
Preterism is built upon a gross misunderstanding of scripture. Jesus was referring to Zechariah and the army that will be surrounding Jerusalem at the time when the Lord returns with His saints from heaven, and the resurrection/rapture, and not the events of 70 AD.
Click to expand...

You keep making this same statement over and over again, but you have failed in identifying for me what this gross misunderstanding of the scripture is. I do not know what preterists teach, nor what they use to try and justify their theology. What is the misunderstanding that you speak of? Because simply posting some scriptures out of Zechariah and the gospels just isn't identifying it for me. What is it that preterists believe about these particular scriptures?

When you bring up the olivet discourse, you seem to place an extreme amount of significance on whether Jesus was speaking to the disciples in the Temple, or whether he was speaking to them in the garden. What is the significance of where the disciples heard his words?

When Jesus spoke to the multitudes in parables, but then spoke privately with the disciples afterword; was he then teaching the disciples a different parable? Or was he expounding on the parable he had already given them?
 
Only in Matthew do the disciples hook on their other two questions about "thy coming and the end of the age"

In Mark and Luke, the disciples stick to questioning about THESE THINGS (the things Jesus had previously mentioned about NOT ONE STONE UPON ANOTHER)
 
It may be a "gross misunderstanding" to try to force Zechariah 14 onto a discourse that speaks of a Temple destruction in 70 AD
 
I don't understand what it is that a "partial preterist" believes. Is someone identified as a partial preterist if they believe the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD fulfilled the prophetical words of Jesus spoken to that specific GENERATION?
 
In none of the 3 gospel accounts of THE OLIVET DISCOURSE (aka THE GREAT ESCHATOLOGICAL DISCOURSE) does it say anything about Jesus' FEET HITTING THE EARTH

It speaks of the sign of the Son of Man in heaven
it speaks about Him in the clouds of heaven -- iow -- the way Jesus told the High Priest he would see Him, and Stephen saw Him when Stephen was being stoned

Feet hitting the earth and cracking the Mount of Olives cannot be tied to this -- no justification for that -- apples and oranges
 
ezrider said:
Is someone identified as a partial preterist if they believe the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD fulfilled the prophetical words of Jesus spoken to that specific GENERATION?
Click to expand...

God, I hope not. I believe that, and I am not a Partial Preterist.

I said from the get-go this thread would be impossible, and there are no Partial preterists here to explain exactly what Partial Preterism IS
 
If you don't mind, I'm going to go back to Daniel and pick up another thought. The people of the prince..

Daniel 9:26
And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Who are the people of the prince who shall come? And how shall they destroy the city and the sanctuary? Does this preclude the events of 70AD? Do we see this answered in the parable of the wedding?

Matthew 22:1-9
And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said, The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son, And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come. Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage. But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise: And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them. But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.

Is this a prophecy of the Roman armies physical destruction of the city in 70AD?
 
Mat 26:63
But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.

Mat 26:64
Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.



Mar 14:61
But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?

Mar 14:62
And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

And Stephen saw Him too at Stephen's martyrdom -- they saw Him IN THAT GENERATION;
though His feet did not touch the earth
 
Anto9us said:
God, I hope not. I believe that, and I am not a Partial Preterist.

I said from the get-go this thread would be impossible, and there are no Partial preterists here to explain exactly what Partial Preterism IS
Click to expand...
I have been labeled a preterist and or a partial pretersit... I have no training in either .. I believe in the return of our Lord so i know i am not a preterist..

The label came from a simple belief in the Words of Jesus ..that have been posted above I think by Anto9us
 
reba said:
I have been labeled a preterist and or a partial pretersit... I have no training in either .. I believe in the return of our Lord so i know i am not a preterist..
Click to expand...

That's kind of my situation here.
There are a couple of theological labels I admit to -- Trinitarian and Arminian -- I own those;
but I refuse to take a label on a position in eschatology.
 
Anto9us said:
It's possible. Wouldn't be the first time God used pagan king's armies for His purposes.
Click to expand...

That is quite true. In fact the book of Daniel foretold how the Lord would reign through those pagan King's until the horn of David.
 
Zec_12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.


Joh 19:33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:
Joh 19:34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.
Joh 19:35 And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.
Joh 19:36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.
Joh 19:37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.

John reads to me like it is saying Zec has been fulfilled
 
Anto9us said:
That's kind of my situation here.
There are a couple of theological labels I admit to -- Trinitarian and Arminian -- I own those;
but I refuse to take a label on a position in eschatology.
Click to expand...
Some labels just help us get to understand what the other person is about .. not all labeling is bad..
 
"Who are the people of the prince who shall come? And how shall they destroy the city and the sanctuary?"

The PEOPLE could be Romans - Romans destroyed the city and the sanctuary - that a Roman PRINCE would come subsequent to the days of Daniel need not mess up Christ as He who confirms a covenant

At one time I thought that it might, and I wondered about this "revived Roman Empire jazz", but I don't really buy into that.
 
Yeah, I don't think all labelling is bad -- it's just with END TIMES -- I see PLAUSIBILITY in several major positions, really, everything but POSTMILLENNIALISM

Sincere people believe what they do about eschatology because of what they think they see in the Scriptures -- they don't just "pull something out of the air" and say "this is my endtimes view!"
 
Anto9us said:
"Who are the people of the prince who shall come? And how shall they destroy the city and the sanctuary?"

The PEOPLE could be Romans - Romans destroyed the city and the sanctuary - that a Roman PRINCE would come subsequent to the days of Daniel need not mess up Christ as He who confirms a covenant

At one time I thought that it might, and I wondered about this "revived Roman Empire jazz", but I don't really buy into that.
Click to expand...

Can we see the destruction of the city and the sanctuary in more than one way? Or maybe the people of the prince? Whether we see the "people" of the prince as the Roman soldiers who destroyed the city or not is not really important in my mind. What is important is recognizing that Christ is the Prince. The Roman armies could not have destroyed the city except they were executing the Lord's Judgement upon them.


But, I wonder if the people of the Prince who shall come could also be seen as the peoples who received the Holy Spirit after the days of Pentecost? For they bring a different kind of destruction.
 
ezrider said:
But, I wonder if the people of the Prince who shall come could also be seen as the peoples who received the Holy Spirit after the days of Pentecost? For they bring a different kind of destruction.
Click to expand...

I never thought of that - seeing it as 'destruction' is odd -- but possible.

back to Zechariah for a minute:

Zec 12:2

Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.

In a way, that has been going on MY WHOLE LIFE - and now Israel gets shelled all the time from their enemies

The "look upon the one they pierced" part of Zechariah 12 may have been fulfilled;
but as far as Zechariah 14 -- Mount of Olives, to my knowledge, is still intact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top