Dorothy Mae
Member
Thanks for your input. I’ve thought those verses refer to the Resurrection. That’s what they sound like to me.
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!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
How did understanding and embracing Preterism affect your faith?
- Thread starter Dorothy Mae
- Start date
SovereignGrace
Member
They do. In Historic Premill, there are 1,000 years between the resurrection of the just and the unjust. In those places I cannot find where there is even an inkling of a notion between those resurrections. I believe in a general resurrection where both sheep and goats are resurrected at the same time.
SovereignGrace
Member
Dispensational Premill teaches 1,007 years between the resurrection of the just and unjust. They have the just resurrected prior to the trib/great trib, that is why I said 1,007 years. HP teaches the just are resurrected after the trib, seeing they are post-trib.
Dorothy Mae
Member
This thread was about Preterism and not dispensational beliefs, but since it’s fairly quiet, it’s ok. I’m pretty skeptical of theologies that claim great deal for the future. I’ve heard a lot that specified exact years with great certainty only to have all of them, 100%, fail. It is an advantage of being a part of the church for half a century.
Last edited:
SovereignGrace
Member
I was just bringing those two systems into the discussion as even though I once held (loosely) to Historic Premill, those passages I previously mentioned where what kept me from jumping fully into that camp. Once I began to understand Preterism(Orthodox or partial, not full) things began to click. And once I came to accept an early date writing of Revelation, things began to really click.
Dorothy Mae
Member
Ok. I’m not very up to date on labels so I’m not sure what position you have, to be honest.
SovereignGrace
Member
Post-Mill and Orthodox Preterist.
Dorothy Mae
Member
Ok, thanks.
stovebolts
Member
It’s not that I don’t have an end times view, I’ve simply not invested any serious study of it.
I tend to focus my time on things that make life better in this world as opposed to the world to come. In the end, regardless if it pre or post mill or any variation in between it’s going to be whatever it’s going to be. For me, Jesus made us a promise that he would never leave or forsake us and this applies to the End Times regardless of which camp one belongs, and that’s good enough for me.
I tend to focus my time on things that make life better in this world as opposed to the world to come. In the end, regardless if it pre or post mill or any variation in between it’s going to be whatever it’s going to be. For me, Jesus made us a promise that he would never leave or forsake us and this applies to the End Times regardless of which camp one belongs, and that’s good enough for me.
Dorothy Mae
Member
Yea, I can see that’s a good position. I am very sorry for the ministries that told young men and women not to “waste their time getting an education or learn a skill” because Jesus is coming soon to Rapture us all out. Just imagine the devastation believing that theology caused as 20+ years have passed and they have to try to make a living as unskilled labor because they believed that teaching.
stovebolts
Member
It reminds me of the first century church prior to 70 ad when they all sold everything and gave to those in need and then find themselves in need…Ironically, Paul even collects funds for them from the other churches…. Maybe that’s why Paul tells the Thessalonians that if they don’t work, they don’t eat.
If you need me to provide those three sections of scripture, let me know and I’ll dig them up. First is from Acts, second Is Corinth and Rome and obviously, the third is Thesolonica.
Nothing new under the sun…. What was true then is still true now.
Don’t work? Ya don’t eat. Sounds pretty cut and dry regardless if your a futurist or not lol!
Dorothy Mae
Member
Thanks for the offer Stovebolts, I smiled. I know those passages so we can go right on into your position.
Since you know I think the time of great tribulation is now over and yet was still in the future of all mentioned in the NT, the move to sell all they had and live in community made sense. For the believers in their 20s, it was going to be destroyed before their lives were up anyway. There would be no physical inheritance to give their children if they lived in Judea for those older than 20. And yet there’s no indication that they no longer worked. Not owning does mean not working. Probably on the contrary, a community needs everyone to work even more than individuals.
So I’m inclined to think that the situation in Jerusalem 40-70AD is quite different than ours. In 70 AD they all got “the heck out of Dodge” in any case. That’s not our situation in my view.
stovebolts
Member
Like I said, I don’t dabble in End tom s much. It was more of an observation. No position taken other than the point that if you don’t work, you don’t eat…
There are varieties of preterism, and I'm not exactly clear as to what is being suggested here.
The scholarly consensus has always been that much NT material - certainly Revelation - was written after the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. I thus find it interesting and curious that there is no explicit mention of that cataclysmic event. Some really excellent NT scholars have recently proposed that the entire NT predates 70 AD, which would explain why the destruction of the temple isn't mentioned.
I admittedly place little theological stock in Revelation. It was one of the most disputed books in terms of whether is should be in the Bible at all. I don't say it has no relevance to today, but I have always felt it was written principally to exhort and reassure a contemporaneous audience, which makes me a preterist to that extent. I feel it receives way too much attention.
Matthew 24 and the corresponding chapters in Mark and Luke are confusing to read. A popular scholarly view is that Jesus was answering two questions and talking about two events - the imminent destruction of the Temple and his future Second Coming. He can scarcely be talking about imminent events that are going to happen in 25 or 30 years when he says:
The scholarly consensus has always been that much NT material - certainly Revelation - was written after the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. I thus find it interesting and curious that there is no explicit mention of that cataclysmic event. Some really excellent NT scholars have recently proposed that the entire NT predates 70 AD, which would explain why the destruction of the temple isn't mentioned.
I admittedly place little theological stock in Revelation. It was one of the most disputed books in terms of whether is should be in the Bible at all. I don't say it has no relevance to today, but I have always felt it was written principally to exhort and reassure a contemporaneous audience, which makes me a preterist to that extent. I feel it receives way too much attention.
Matthew 24 and the corresponding chapters in Mark and Luke are confusing to read. A popular scholarly view is that Jesus was answering two questions and talking about two events - the imminent destruction of the Temple and his future Second Coming. He can scarcely be talking about imminent events that are going to happen in 25 or 30 years when he says:
Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains.
Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Dorothy Mae
Member
The preponderance of internal evidence, as you suggest, is pre 70AD. Same for the NT.
I agree. The purpose of the thread was to see if anyone else had the extraordinary experience of being freed from the Futurist doom and gloom theology that promises terrible persecution and the complete destruction of society.
What is more, Revelation and Matthew 24 open up in such clarity after decades of obscurity, it was remarkable. Not to mention the thrill of seeing that prophesy in detail was fulfilled. It’s like reading Isaiah 51 and being thrilled at knowing how it was fulfilled.
It was having scales fall from my eyes. Just wondered if that was a singular experience.
This is simple math.
It would be like having Noah’s life story told and ending before the first drop of rain falls. Can you imagine the story beginning with God’s warning to him of a coming storm, instructions to build a boat and his obedience. The animals gather en masse at the door of the ark.... and then the story ends.
But wait! The flood actually happened! Why no mention of it in scripture? It would only make sense if the story told had ended before the event occurred.
Of course the eye witness accounts were written earlier than “scholars” can affirm. There are no known originals to be assessed. Just copies of copies. Impossible to validate.
I don't disagree with your perspective, but the dating of the NT documents is a very sophisticated, highly technical exercise that has occupied hundreds of world-class scholars, some of them devout believers and some not. The consensus has always placed some of the documents well after 70 AD. Revelation is typically dated to 90-100 AD.
I honestly haven't read the latest scholarship claiming all documents predate 70 AD. Frankly, that sounds unlikely to me, but I am of course influenced by the current consensus and will keep an open mind. The principal book seems to be Rethinking the Dates of the New Testament: The Evidence for Early Composition by Jonathan Bernier, https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09B2NC4XG/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1. It was just published on May 3, so I haven't read it - but I will. Bernier apparently dates Revelation to 68-70 AD,
Here is an excellent, very comprehensive review of the book: https://thinkchristiantheism.blogspot.com/2022/05/a-review-of-jonathan-berniers.html. The review makes clear that the book is scholarly and intended for an academic audience, which is good news to me - it isn't lunatic fringe pseudo-scholarship. Certainly, a pre-70 date for all the key documents would explain why the destruction of the temple isn't mentioned.
My view is apparently "partial preterism." It gives me no particular comfort because, as I said above, Jesus' description of the end times preceding his Second Coming makes clear that things are going to be pretty ghastly. The question than becomes, "Do I think that I and other believers will be here during them?" As one who believes the only rapture is going to be at the Second Coming, I do believe I will suffer through those times if I'm still alive.
Dorothy Mae
Member
The internal evidence is around 60 something AD. Jesus said the events in Revelation would SOON take place. They didn’t take place after 100 AD. Jesus told John he would appear before kings still.He was around 60 at the time of the revelation. Jerusalem was mentioned in Revelation and gone by 100AD. There is more. Those who like the late dating don’t like the fulfillment theology.