What are the beliefs?
ECT What is Preterism
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
In a nutshell as to these nuts - that the Bible appears to contradict itself, so it's off to sources outside Scripture for one's answers and anyone who actually believes Matt. 4:4 and 2 Tim. 3:16-17, in other words; who simply relies in faith on Scripture alone for the answers to such seeming contradictions is a fool.
They will now post attempted, vain, failed rebuttals proving this very fact.
Given this "what are the beliefs" after that one, are a total waste of time to bother with.
Interplanner
Well-known member
As usual, avoid post-ers who are here to insult rather than educate.
It is a belief system in eschatology in which the most significant events happened very early in the launch of the church, mostly no later than the catastrophic destruction of Israel in 70 AD. Some of Preterism has a belief that the New Creation of 2 Cor 5 and Gal 6 actually refers to the completion of the switch from Judaism to the Christian community that would have taken place in the 70 AD event.
The main problem with that view would be that then one almost has to say that the 2nd coming has taken place. Those preterists who do so are Full Preterists. Some online sites like TOL will not allow it to be represented. Partial preterism is more balanced by saying that the 2nd coming in judgement must still be a future event.
All preterism constrasts with FUTURISM in which the most significant events are future (to us) and also in which the historic things between 30-70 AD in Judea just really don't matter. Most popular current eschatology which watches current news as 'prophecy' is futurist.
Preterism generally views the Revelation as a pastoral piece to help Jews in Judea in the turmoil of the 6th decade respond to it. While the 'harlot' is 'stoned,' the 'bride' and the 'wedding' take place and life goes on in the very long reign of Christ. Futurism instead has a detailed chronological treatment of the Rev that is, well, future.
The question then turns to 'when did one or the other start?' Mark, Matthew and Peter mention a possible delay at the destruction of Jerusalem. It would be the 2nd coming which was delayed. And obviously was. But so many references and sayings of Jesus and Paul put the two together (the DofJ and the 2nd Coming) so tightly that it was widely expected to be a 1-2 event. When the 2nd coming did not happen, all bets were off. There is no immediate belief expressed that there must be a batch of future events in Judea.
In about 100 years, one early church father had a view that there would be. He did not associate Dan 9 with the DofJ, but said future things would happen to Israel.
In the 16th century, Protestants frequently referred to the Papacy as Antichrist. The Pope commissioned the Jesuit Ribera to develop an eschatology that would invalidate this. It was futurist. Indeed, it has many of the working parts still in use today: a Jewish AC, events in Israel, a rebuilt temple. All to save the Pope's position and face.
In the 19th century, this friction was still so high that the Brethren movement in England wished to intervene. One thing they did was to make the Riberan doctrines very popular in cognito. At the same time, many Jews were trying to return home from Europe, having had enough of blame by both Protestants and Catholics for problems in the world. This coincidence catapulted excitement about futurism even though it has an enormous problem in its method: it must 'jump' over the immediate situations mentioned by Jesus and say that all that is (oddly) for people 2000 years away, even though it is expressed in direct, vital language.
It is a belief system in eschatology in which the most significant events happened very early in the launch of the church, mostly no later than the catastrophic destruction of Israel in 70 AD. Some of Preterism has a belief that the New Creation of 2 Cor 5 and Gal 6 actually refers to the completion of the switch from Judaism to the Christian community that would have taken place in the 70 AD event.
The main problem with that view would be that then one almost has to say that the 2nd coming has taken place. Those preterists who do so are Full Preterists. Some online sites like TOL will not allow it to be represented. Partial preterism is more balanced by saying that the 2nd coming in judgement must still be a future event.
All preterism constrasts with FUTURISM in which the most significant events are future (to us) and also in which the historic things between 30-70 AD in Judea just really don't matter. Most popular current eschatology which watches current news as 'prophecy' is futurist.
Preterism generally views the Revelation as a pastoral piece to help Jews in Judea in the turmoil of the 6th decade respond to it. While the 'harlot' is 'stoned,' the 'bride' and the 'wedding' take place and life goes on in the very long reign of Christ. Futurism instead has a detailed chronological treatment of the Rev that is, well, future.
The question then turns to 'when did one or the other start?' Mark, Matthew and Peter mention a possible delay at the destruction of Jerusalem. It would be the 2nd coming which was delayed. And obviously was. But so many references and sayings of Jesus and Paul put the two together (the DofJ and the 2nd Coming) so tightly that it was widely expected to be a 1-2 event. When the 2nd coming did not happen, all bets were off. There is no immediate belief expressed that there must be a batch of future events in Judea.
In about 100 years, one early church father had a view that there would be. He did not associate Dan 9 with the DofJ, but said future things would happen to Israel.
In the 16th century, Protestants frequently referred to the Papacy as Antichrist. The Pope commissioned the Jesuit Ribera to develop an eschatology that would invalidate this. It was futurist. Indeed, it has many of the working parts still in use today: a Jewish AC, events in Israel, a rebuilt temple. All to save the Pope's position and face.
In the 19th century, this friction was still so high that the Brethren movement in England wished to intervene. One thing they did was to make the Riberan doctrines very popular in cognito. At the same time, many Jews were trying to return home from Europe, having had enough of blame by both Protestants and Catholics for problems in the world. This coincidence catapulted excitement about futurism even though it has an enormous problem in its method: it must 'jump' over the immediate situations mentioned by Jesus and say that all that is (oddly) for people 2000 years away, even though it is expressed in direct, vital language.
In short, a long winded excuse from someone who is ever insisting others be succint.
A long winded post that says very little about Preterism's actual beliefs.
And for your info, I Am a Berean is a Full Preterist.
While you are also well aware, Interplanner, that your buddy, Tet, also believes the Lord already returned.
But that's the Preterist on TOL for you.
A long winded post that says very little about Preterism's actual beliefs.
And for your info, I Am a Berean is a Full Preterist.
While you are also well aware, Interplanner, that your buddy, Tet, also believes the Lord already returned.
But that's the Preterist on TOL for you.
Already returned, that is crazy and not scriptural.
Interplanner
Well-known member
All of the distinct beliefs of preterism and the contrasting futurism are there.
In this case, they have (church) history, which makes them even more colorful and articulated, so it was worth spelling out.
You're right about Tet and the 'return' and I don't know why he does that. Granted I HAVE 100X THE PROBLEM WITH EVERYTHING DANOH SAYS AND HIS PERSISTENT RIDICULE AND INSULTS AS A "CHRISTIAN". If you are long, he wants you short. If you are short, he wants you long. Anything for another opportunity to ridicule, insult, disrespect. Never about the exegetical question at hand.
In this case, they have (church) history, which makes them even more colorful and articulated, so it was worth spelling out.
You're right about Tet and the 'return' and I don't know why he does that. Granted I HAVE 100X THE PROBLEM WITH EVERYTHING DANOH SAYS AND HIS PERSISTENT RIDICULE AND INSULTS AS A "CHRISTIAN". If you are long, he wants you short. If you are short, he wants you long. Anything for another opportunity to ridicule, insult, disrespect. Never about the exegetical question at hand.
I have tried asking tet and he never answers
Interplanner
Well-known member
PJ,
I can't tell if you are being deliberately de-railing here. Why do you need to ask Tet? What is missing from the impartial summary I gave?
You copied and pasted a list of Mid-Acts beliefs or understandings (you then proceeded to prove you are absolutely in the dark about).
But when asked about your system's beliefs you rambled on about Preterism's supposed glory.
The guy asked what are its beliefs.
Ten to one you fail to post (prove) Preterism's uniquely its own assertions backed by Scripture.
Since you have never shown you know what such a thing would look like, here is a simple example.
The Apostle Paul was the Apostle of the Gentiles, Rom. 11:13; Eph. 3:1; 2 Tim. 4:17.
The concept behind three Scripture references itself being based on three references, Isaiah 8:20; Matthew 18:16; 2 Cor. 4:13 (although more could be cited, Luke 24:44; Acts 17:2, to name two more).
What is Preterism - a teaching full of holes.
Preterism's actual "bible" the writings of...
JOSEPHUS War of the Jews:
Book 7 - Chapter 1
Preterism's actual "bible" the writings of...
JOSEPHUS War of the Jews:
Book 7 - Chapter 1
Are the towers there today?
If not please tell us when the three towers were destroyed ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ClimateSanity
New member
They were destroyed in an earthquake in 363 A.D.
That the Steelers are superior.
musterion
Well-known member
Preterism is a idiosyncratic, truly backward, and relatively recent system of Bible misinterpretation. Instead of passages being understood as literal or figurative, or as applicable or not applicable to today according to their context, timing or the persons addressed, the Bible is read through the lens of a basic presupposition that is never, ever questioned - that the vast majority of Bible prophecy has already been fulfilled. Everything else about preterism follows from that basic assumption.
It usually also entails, among its adherents, salvation maintained by works under threat of damnation and its members (as represented on TOL) are generally reticent about explaining or discussing the saving Gospel.
In other words, it's a cult.
It usually also entails, among its adherents, salvation maintained by works under threat of damnation and its members (as represented on TOL) are generally reticent about explaining or discussing the saving Gospel.
In other words, it's a cult.
musterion
Well-known member
He won't care. Josephus and spurious noncanonical "epistles" are on par with Scripture if and whenever they can be quote-mined to support preterism. If they can't, they are to be disregarded.
The basic assumption of preterism cannot ever be honestly examined. That's why rational discussion is impossible.
Wrong again mysteryboy.
Preterism can be found being taught by the early church fathers.
Preterism cannot be traced to one man like Dispensationalism.
Just remember, cults are started by one man, Dispensationalism was started by one man.
musterion
Well-known member
Maybe it's just my personality, I dunno. But if I were a convinced, committed preterist, I'd find the Bible to be pretty much a closed book not worth discussing at any length. What would be the point? THIS is the Kingdom? Okay...so now what?
The LAST place I would be is someplace like TOL, arguing in support of a view that has no impact upon my life except (judging by Tet and IP) to make me deliberately contentious, closed-minded, apt to prevaricate and literally obsessed with slandering J.N. Darby and destroying disp'ism.
What the hell is the point of that?
If I were REALLY convinced Christ is even now enthroned (invisibly) over all and is ruling the earth (invisibly) as His Kingdom, I'd find such activities utterly pointless and depressing. I'd be out doing...I don't know what but not this.
But again, maybe it's just me.
The LAST place I would be is someplace like TOL, arguing in support of a view that has no impact upon my life except (judging by Tet and IP) to make me deliberately contentious, closed-minded, apt to prevaricate and literally obsessed with slandering J.N. Darby and destroying disp'ism.
What the hell is the point of that?
If I were REALLY convinced Christ is even now enthroned (invisibly) over all and is ruling the earth (invisibly) as His Kingdom, I'd find such activities utterly pointless and depressing. I'd be out doing...I don't know what but not this.
But again, maybe it's just me.
As we see, mysteryboy and Danoh the Darby follower deny that Luke 19:43-44 was fulfilled in 70AD.
Yet neither of them can explain how Luke 19:43-44 will be fulfilled in the future.
For their claims to be true, a third temple would have to be built, then that third temple would have to be destroyed with not one stone left standing upon another.
Nowhere in the Bible do we find such nonsense.
Moreover, Luke 19:43-44 makes it crystal clear that the destruction comes to those who rejected Christ Jesus, not some future group of people.
Danoh and mysteryboy are a mess.
Yet neither of them can explain how Luke 19:43-44 will be fulfilled in the future.
For their claims to be true, a third temple would have to be built, then that third temple would have to be destroyed with not one stone left standing upon another.
Nowhere in the Bible do we find such nonsense.
Moreover, Luke 19:43-44 makes it crystal clear that the destruction comes to those who rejected Christ Jesus, not some future group of people.
Danoh and mysteryboy are a mess.