You are hereInterview with Tim King, President of Presence Ministries

Interview with Tim King, President of Presence Ministries

  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/views.module on line 842.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_argument::init() should be compatible with views_handler::init(&$view, $options) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_argument.inc on line 745.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 589.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter.inc on line 589.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter_boolean_operator::value_validate() should be compatible with views_handler_filter::value_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/planetpreterist.com/sites/all/modules/views/handlers/views_handler_filter_boolean_operator.inc on line 149.

By Virgil - Posted on 28 April 2004

Several months ago, while in the process of planning the TruthVoice 2004 conference, our board decided to invite Tim King, the president of Presence Ministries to be the keynote speaker for the conference. Little did we realize the firestorm our decision was to create. E-mails have been floating around mischaracterizing Tim's doctrine and theology, and outright slandering his character, so we decided that a one-on-one interview with Tim would be the best way to know the man, his ministry and his vision. Let's also hear his side of the story...Virgil: Tim, thank you for agreeing to this interview. I know you are a busy individual, and I appreciate you taking the time to answer some questions for the readers of our website, and the attendees of the TruthVoice 2004 conference. Hopefully this will dispel some of the misrepresentations, and sometimes outright lies concerning you that we have come across.

Tim: It is my pleasure, Virgil. And I am grateful to you and the heart you have toward getting the message of fulfilled prophecy out to the world. Interviews are often helpful tools because of a principle written about in the Wisdom Literature: “Each man seems right until his neighbor comes along and questions him” (Proverbs 18:17). In this light I appreciate the opportunity to clarify some things that may be of interest to our movement at large and to question some of the inaccurate things that are causing division.

Virgil: I know that Presence Ministries International is a ministry dedicated to furthering the truth of Scripture, and making people aware of the “living presence” of Christ. In general terms, so are most preterists. Are “Transmillennialism” and “preterism” really incompatible positions? Are you not in fact also a “preterist”?

Tim: There is a bit of irony in the way you worded your question. If I say, “yes, I am a preterist,” then am I part of “most” of the preterist community that is making people aware of the “living presence” of Christ or the other part of the preterist community that is not? I think your word “most” is an interesting, and accurate choice of words. Clearly, there are many ‘degrees’ of preterist thought—some of which brings the fullness of Christ and his kingdom to reality now, some that postpones some or even much of that living presence for the future dimension (i.e., post-physical existence). Perhaps I can answer your question this way: my theology, which I call Covenant Eschatology, is a preterist view of Scripture. The term “preterist” means “past” or “fulfilled.” I read once on your site where someone misquoted me as saying that preterism was not even invented until the mid-90’s. What I said was, that preterism as it has come to be known today was not even defined until the 90’s. In other words, a preterist view of Scripture has existed for hundreds of years. However, the idea of full, partial, hyper, consistent, IBD (incorruptible body at death) versus IBD (immortal body at death), was never a discussion until the last part of the 20th century. This has created a situation of confusion where one may no longer say, “I’m a preterist,” without then going through a litany of discussion about just what type or flavor of preterist he is. A word that comes to mean “many” things eventually comes to mean little or nothing at all.

So you ask, am I a preterist? The only way I can answer this is to say that my theology is preterist, believing that the restoration of all things, Acts 3:21, is past. In THAT sense, yes, I hold to a preterist view of Scripture and, therefore, preterism and Transmillennialism are not at all incompatible. But I would also like to add that the Transmillennial view is a developing worldview…not just a theological position.

Virgil: So are you and Presence Ministries working against preterism, or do you think the two positions compliment each other?

Tim: Presence Ministries is not working “against” anything. Whether individually or as a ministry, each of us has to make a decision on how we approach our understanding of truth and then how we are going to communicate it. The board of PMI has made a conscious decision that we will have a “contribution” versus “conversion” mentality. What we mean by this is that when one takes a conversionist approach to a subject, it only serves to draw lines and it tells those with whom we disagree that we are right and believe that they are wrong. In essence, this repels dialogue versus building it. Our aim is to “contribute” to the lives of others by positively putting forth the truth as we see it. We don’t debate. We don’t get on message boards and argue. We choose instead to keep our shoulder to the plow and with the mind and heart of Christ, continue to put out the truth as we see it. If others disagree, that is okay…out theology does not demand that anyone else believe it. We can only control ourselves, not others. Therefore, we seek to build up, not tear down. In this we believe that we have learned from past mistakes and are dedicated to a future more in line with reflecting the heart of God as we understand it. Many “preterists” (choose your definition) are doing good work in contributing to the discussion regarding fulfilled prophecy and we applaud their efforts.

Virgil: Some “leaders” in the preterist camp have been asserting that you are a universalist, because of some of the aspects of Comprehensive Grace. Well, I should ask you plainly, are you a universalist? Do you subscribe to “some form” of universalism and do you believe that everyone will go to heaven after his or her physical death?

Tim: Good questions—let me take them one at a time.

You (Virgil) say: “Some ‘leaders’ in the preterist camp have been asserting that you are a universalist, because of some of the aspects of Comprehensive Grace.”

Let me (Tim) respond to this up front. I challenge those ‘leaders’ to find where I have ever said that I am a universalist either in print form or oral lecture. Where is the proof? If they cannot find it, and they cannot, for I have never said this, then they should repent for their misrepresentation. Not only have I never said I am a universalist, I have written about why I am NOT.

One humorous story might help make the point as to how irrational some are in trying to keep others from walking with us. When first investigating the field of fulfilled prophecy, one person was told by another ministry leader that I was a universalist and an annihilationist—it made them wonder, if I’m a universalist, then who’s left to be annihilated?! It didn’t take them long to see through the person who was laying out the divisive line about our ministry. I’m happy to say that person is now a monthly supporter…as for the ministry leader? Well, let’s just say that he’s still using that line and hasn’t figured out the contradiction yet.

You (Virgil) ask: “Well, I should ask you plainly, are you a universalist?”

(Tim) No, I am not. I abhor the entire universalist position. If I may, let me share a written quote from my article entitled, Comprehensive Grace, an article where much has been quoted out of context. “A great problem with the modern Universalist movement is its low view or marginalizing of Christ and scripture regarding the salvation of mankind. Typically, those espousing universal salvation do so apart from the covenantal framework of biblical eschatology. This breech creates a void that does irreparable damage to the Christ story and relies more on philosophical presupposition than inspired prophetic fulfillment, not to mention that it approaches the entirety of the issue of salvation from a modern, Western perspective.” (End quote)

Note that I address a “great problem” with the universalist position and that I clearly put forth an argument against it saying that it takes a “low view” and even “marginalizes” the work of Christ. In this light, for someone to apply the universalist tag to me is at best irresponsible and at worst “sowing discord among brethren” (listed as an abomination to God: Proverbs 6:16-19). Why would somebody do that? What gain do they receive by misrepresenting me in this way? What motives are at work?—certainly these are all interesting questions to be raised.

You (Virgil) ask: “Do you subscribe to “some form” of universalism and do you believe that everyone will go to heaven after his or her physical death?”

(Tim) No, I do not subscribe to “some form” of universalism. I believe that each person will stand before God and I’m quite sure He will continue to deal with them according to his eternal nature—In further answering this, again allow me to share another quote from my article:

“The impetus of the Comprehensive Grace position is to neither lend credence to the limited salvation of humanity as held by many fundamentalist evangelicals nor to open the door to the religious relativism held by so many teaching universal salvation. Instead, proponents of Comprehensive Grace seek to re-frame the entire issue of salvation by placing it back into its first-century, covenantal setting…
Proponents of Comprehensive Grace are content to leave the judging of individuals to God for he alone has the knowledge of good and evil and he alone understands all that is needed to prepare the way for his holy and righteous love…
For adherents of Comprehensive Grace the message of the greatest story ever told is about inspiring others to know and fall in love with God – not to spend a lifetime trying to avoid the fate of eternal torment. The thrust of scripture is to be compelled by God’s love (2 Cor. 5:14), not religions fear. The call is for the creation to find abundant life by aligning itself with the universal spiritual teachings of the Creator, to find freedom, love and acceptance by living for God in living for the building up of humanity. In essence, the call of those embracing Comprehensive Grace is to bring the world to its knees by being Christ to the world.” (End quote)

I have never made the statement that everyone who has ever lived will, has been or is saved. My quote above is clear—God and God alone knows the hearts of man and his intentions for dealing with them. Our job is to share his abundant love with the world. It seems odd that so many would find this offensive and seek to label it as universalism or some form of universalism.

Virgil: So then, do you feel any need and obligation to explain what Comprehensive Grace is?

Tim: This is something that is as broad as the issue of what covenant fulfillment means. I’ve only written one article on this subject, and its certainly impossible to do it justice in just one article, but we plan on putting together a DVD series on it in the near future. Perhaps then people will have a greater grasp of what we’re saying and what we’re not.

Virgil: When should we expect Max King’s work on Comprehensive Grace to be completed?

Tim: His work is actually focusing on Romans 9-11. He’ll be doing this by taking an overarching approach to the entire Book of Romans. This will go a long way in helping set the table for a greater perspective on the efficacy of the cross event. We’re hoping that it is published by this time next year, but, as always, the goal is to get it right versus getting it quickly.

Virgil: The theme of the TruthVoice 2004 conference is, “The Road Ahead.” What can attendees expect to learn from you on this topic, and generally on how Covenant Eschatology affects our lives and future?

Tim: I’m very excited about the conference you have put together and am honored to be one of its participants. I hope to use my allotted time to identify where we are, how we have arrived at this point and then how we must move forward. To do this, we will look at the time of Jesus, the futures he faced and then compare them to our day and the future scenarios that we are facing. If we’re going to navigate the road ahead by utilizing the fulfilled truth of the greatest story ever told, then we must understand the four entities that make the world go round and learn to lead with love and not dogma—to create an up-stream versus side-stream life and ministry. As well, we’ll talk about worldviews and what type of worldview holds the most hope for transforming the world of the 21st century. As I look at your lineup of speakers I know that TruthVoice 2004 should be very enlightening and I hope many people make the effort to attend.

Virgil: Tim, thank you for your time, do you have any other comments?

Tim: I guess my final comment would be to thank you for allowing me this opportunity to respond to some of the inaccuracies being spread. I think this interview format is an excellent way to work toward harmony and understanding. I would also say that I would welcome more of this in the future to further explain things about Presence Ministries, Max, or myself in general. Understanding each other builds bridges. Buying into unchallenged stories we sometimes tell ourselves (or allow others to tell us) about others burns them down. There are too few of us not to be walking together. For 2000 years the world has suffered at the hands of sectarianism, we can’t afford to continue the same much longer.

Thank you, Virgil—you’re doing a great work!

Samantha's picture

I'm just wondering, is it still "outright slandering of his character" if it's TRUE?

Terry's picture

Now this is the spirit of Jesus, the Christ. Jesus was-is-always will be- a bridgebuilder. I commend both Tim and Virgil for the spirit of this interview. May God bless us in all attitudes and actions that please him...and may he hinder us in all attitudes and actions that break his heart.
For all who are considering coming to the TRUTHVOICE 2004 Conference this year, you're in for a blessing. Tim King is one of the foremost spokesmen for a fulfilled understanding of biblical prophecy, not only dealing effectively with scripture prooftext, but examining where this leads us in this joyous age of the Messiah! Virgil, with diligent study and love for God, has sprinted to national leadership in prophetic understanding with his great work with Planetpreterist and Truthvoice. Make your reservations now for two days that will be worth two months. These men, along with some of the other most prominent and effective spokesmen on biblical eschatology will bless your study in ways you'll treasure for years. Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also...invest in these two days. They will pay dividends for years to come. See you in Dayton soon...if you know what I mean by soon.
Terry Hall
Dayton, Ohio

Randude's picture

Thanks so much for sharing your heart for ministry with us Tim! I am looking forward to the conference and hearing more!

Roderick's picture

Not too long ago I met with Tim King & Jay Gary while they were in Indianapolis for a brief stop over. I must concur that the focus of PMI is admirable.

Having attended a fundamental Baptist church for over 11 years I can fully relate to how quickly we can label people. It reminds me of these expressions:

“I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.” – Lk 18:11

AND

“They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father.” – John 8:39

Now bear in mind I consider myself a “Calvinist” – but is it really inconsistent, even as a Calvinist to allow God to judge? This does not mean we neglect to point out the “specks” in others eyes while we also consider and confess the “planks” in our own perspective. But if we spent more time simply showing them how we are removing the planks from our own eyes, perhaps it would take barely the effort for them to remove the speaks from their eyes.

I spoke with Tim about the compatibility of Preterism and Transmil™ and he seemed to take the approach of “…he that is not against us is for us” – Lk 9:50

I like that approach, it is a Biblical approach, and it is a Christ-like approach. I can see just the opposite spirit working in some of the current situations in the world. Take for instance the conflict with the Muslim world. Obviously many desire freedom, even in Iraq but they don’t want to work alongside the U.S. because it would appear that they were working with the “enemy”. I think we Christians sometimes maintain that “tribal” mentality by saying – “I can’t work with that person or that group – that would be compromising.” -- Would it really? Or are we sometimes too proud to “sup with the Gentiles in front of our fellow Jews?” -- Gal 2:12

I’m obviously not talking about becoming the world to reach the world, but rather displaying who we really are – more than conquerors in Christ. True conquerors need not flap around like proud roosters, nor brood with up turned noses at the rest of the hen house, but rather by our actions they shall know us. We ARE the kings and priests of this kingdom. Let’s stop acting like occupiers and begin behaving like the true sons we are. This means WE own the world (in Christ’s name). WE should be developing it, helping nurture the people here towards the mercy, grace, love and most of all PRESENCE of Christ.

I want to thank Virgil and Tim for displaying this interview here for us to read. I hope it inspires us to get off our haunches and be active in not merely advancing the kingdom but more so in living in it, displaying it to the world.

Thanks again -- All glory to God
Roderick

Virgil's picture

I want to thank Virgil and Tim for displaying this interview here for us to read. I hope it inspires us to get off our haunches and be active in not merely advancing the kingdom but more so in living in it, displaying it to the world.

Yes Roderick, I am glad you enjoyed it. We need to show unity in face of danger, especially when the danger comes from within. Division will not advance what we are trying to accomplish, that is certain. I am thankful for people like you that can think for themselves and not listen to rumors coming from the shadows. Let's hope that all of us can grow up, mature spiritually and like you said, get off our backs and display God's kingdom and love to the world...

Jer2329's picture

After years of closely studying mesages and articles (including Tim King's article) about Tim King's "comprehensive grace" doctrine, and now after reading this interview wherein Tim King has answered specific and pointed questions about "comprehensive grace," I have only one question:

What does "Comprehensive Grace" mean?

Dave Green
http://www.preteristcosmos.com

Apollos's picture

I too would like to hear a simple, concise statement defining CG.

Jim Wade
http://www.eschatology101.com

Virgil's picture

I don't want the comments on this article to turn into a Comprehensive Grace thread. I suggest contacting Tim directly or using the discussion Forum to talk about Comprehensive Grace in detail.

Apollos's picture

Virgil, I understand and agree. I'm not looking for details. I just want a simple, concise statement which goes to the core idea of CG. That may be in some thread here, but I haven't seen it.

Virgil's picture

There are MANY threads on the issue. Go into Forums and click on the Comprehensive Grace forum...there are plenty of discussions...and speculations.

- virgil

Apollos's picture

Exactly my point. I don't really want speculations and discussions. Just a simple, straightforward statement presenting the essence of CG. For example, there is much than can be said about preterism, but a simple general statement is that preterism views the events of biblical eschatology to have occurred in the period around A.D. 70.

Does CG defy reduction to such a simple statement?

Virgil's picture

You can ask this question into the discussion forums where there are many threads onthe topic of Comprehensive Grace.

Batman's picture

Dave,

I second that question! I cannot find any one thing that distinguishes "Comprehensive Grace" from Universalism. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it's a duck! At this point, "Comprehensive Grace" is whatever Tim King says it is. Until I hear a detailed description of what separates "Comprehensive Grace" from Universalism, I will pass.

--Batman

--Batman

Virgil's picture

Guys, the man said he was not a universalist, and Comprehensive Grace is not universalism.

Do you WANT Tim King to be a universalist, and Comprehensive Grace to be universalism?

Batman's picture

Virgil,

We sincerely just want to know what the difference is. This, in my opinion is not too much to ask. Most leaders within the Preterist movement cannot distinguish any noticeable difference between the two doctrines. I know, because I have personally asked many of them. Because of this, I am considering the doctrine something that currently cannot be measured (until Tim defines it). Therefore, I am staying away from it.

--Batman

--Batman

Virgil's picture

Because of this, I am considering the doctrine something that currently cannot be measured (until Tim defines it). Therefore, I am staying away from it.

If by staying away from it you mean "you don't believe or susbcribe to comprehensive grace", then neither do I for some of the same reasons. I also want to know what Comprehensiv Grace is, yet, before I jump the fence and label Tim King as a "universalist", I am willing to wait either for Max King's book, or for some sort of detailed work on the topic...which will come out whenever they want to put it out, not when I demand so.

Why not then, when Tim unequivocally says he is NOT a universalist, display the spirit of Christ and believe him at his word? Why not, rather than sending out mass e-mails in which he is being oxymoronically called both a universalist and an annihilationist (because of Comprehensive Grace AND without knowing what Comprehensive Grace even is), wait for Presence Ministries to open an official discussion on the topic?

Are our egos really that big that unless Tim King makes a public statement on what Comprehensive Grace is, so that we can be fully satisfied, we automatically label him a universalist despite his denial of being one?

At TruthVoice 2004, Comprehensive Grace will not be discussed, nor will be annihilationism. The recent e-mails sent by certain individuals are not only misrepresenting Tim King's beliefs, but also misrepresenting the conference. This divisive tactics are not biblical and are working against everything we are trying to do. They are slanderous and misguided, and honest individuals who are able to think for themselves will see right through them.

leslie's picture

You guys are acting like Tim is the owner of "Comprehensive Grace."

Comprehensive Grace, as discussed by the individuals here on this thread who preach it, IS UNIVERSALISM.

I have YET to meet someone who believes in COMPREHENSIVE GRACE and is NOT a universalist. Meaning: everyone is reconcilled to God. IE. NO ONE GOES TO HELL.

So it is in Tim's best interest, either to stop labeling himself a Comprehensive Grace believer, or define HIS version of it. Because universalists have completely taken over that label in EVERY preterist forum I have seen.

God Bless,
Nate

Brother Les

Virgil's picture

Nate...did you actually read the interview?

Virgil's picture

Virgil,
I did not say he WAS a universalist, I am saying the label of Comprehensive Grace is one that universalists use. So if he says he is
1. Not a universalist
but
2. Believes in a form of Comprehensive Grace

he may want to switch his terminology.

Yes I read it. Am I misunderstanding something?

Virgil's picture

I just wanted to make sure you are not accusing Tim of being a universalist when he clearly said he is not. Here is the problem as I see it:

1. People out there don't exactly know what comprehensive grace is.

2. Because Tim refuses to talk to "them" on their terms, they thing they know what comprehensive grace is.

3. They accuse Tim of being a universalist while they don't know what CG is.

In the latest message I saw from someone, this person was admitting that he doesn't know what Comprehensive Grace is, but AT THE SAME TIME was accusing Tim of being both an annihilationist AND a universalist.

This is totally unacceptable! Not only does this not motivate anyone to talk about CG, but it is ridiculous to admit at the same time that you don't understand CG but you just know it IS universalism.

In your opinion, just answer one question...is this a fair and christian treatment of another brother in Christ?

valensname's picture

Of course not. I don't believe we should say that someone is what he is not.

But this is why Tim may as well stop using the CG terminology.
I don't care who coined the phrase, the fact is it is synonymous with universalism today in the year 2004. Comprehensive Grace as discussed on any preterist website over the past 2 years, is universalist thought. So if he does not want the label of universalist, he should reconsider his loyaly to the phrase Comprehensive Grace.

But for the record, I don't even see where his website makes him unique?! What is the deal? He is a full preterist by my account, not a universalist by his admission, where is the preterist vs Transmillenial controversy??

In a word, what makes him a different preterist than you or I?
God Bless
Nate

Roderick's picture

Nate,
If I could interact upon what you have asked. Whether or not this is true, it is the perception that the Transmil "camp" were the pioneers in fulfiiled eschatology. It reminds me of the contrast between the original Reformers and the so-called sectarians... which mainly meant the Anabaptists. The Reformed that came out of the Lutheran, Zwingli, & Calvinist camps looked down on the Anabaptists as some how illegitimates. Before anyone thinks I'm berating the Reformers, let me say that they had good cause to look upon the Anabaptist with suspect. The Anabaptist were mainly, and originally composed of the peasant classes, the uneducated classes. Their handling of Scripture was sometimes questionable because like is often done today by futurists, they would read things into the text that wasn't there all in the name of saying they are reading it literally.

Now, having said all of that, it seems the Transmil camp views the preterist camp more or less as the low preterists while they are the high preterists. In this I mean that while those who still use the name preterist are considered brothers in fulfilled eschatology, it would seem that preterists are like the peasants of the Reformation; loosely bound and not as goal oriented. Whereas the Transmil's have set out to organize and have a clear plan of direction.

I've said else where, that there is room for both. That we Preterists should not deplore our station. I prefer working on the steps of the Castle Church (ref to where Luther preached) while others give fancy sermons within the walls. We Preterists have a unique opportunity just as the Transmils have their station. I would like to see us both interact more so that any preceived division is decreased. Although, I will not be able to make the Truthvoice conference because I already have a family trip planned for that week, I do look forward to interacting with my brothers and sisters all across the fufilled eschatology spectrum.

I've rambled long enough...
Roderick

TRKing's picture

Roderick, thank you for your comments. Where "articficial" differences arise is when people attach thougths to our (PMI's) actions that we ourselves do not carry. To go the route of trying to develop beyond theology and into a significant millennial worldview, some have labeled us as "elitists." We're simply trying to be faithful to our call. Part of that is rising above preterism. Please hear what I'm saying. Preterism currently ALSO includes strains that we cannot be associated with, i.e., "partial" preterism. We felt it confusing and by definition, self-defeating, to try to live out our call in the name of a word meaning "past" versus the present and future. We hold dialogue with a lot of people in a lot of places--and the preterist term was becoming much more of a hindrance than an help (for us). That is not an indictment upon those who choose otherwise, who choose to embrace the preterist term, nor do we desire to be called names for making our choice not too embrace the preterist moniker.
Our desire was just to escape the preterist wars in general--wars that are keeping many people from studyig a fulfilled approach to Scripture. This is the exact reason for going to a different term altogether--Transmillennialism. There are many other reasons as well, perhaps they will be handled in future interviews with Virgil (his call). We aren't interested in being anything other than faithful to the task as set before US, and that is our sole reason for existing.
Thanks for your work.

davo's picture

Tim,
Can't you give us a laymans term definition of Comprehensive Grace to just end this whole dispute??!
I have debated CG proponents and found EVERY ONE to be a believer that ALL MEN ARE RECONCILLED TO GOD in the end. And most recommend Max King...
Since this is the onle definition out there that I can find, and you say you are not a universalist, can you give me your definition?

Please do not give the same response as Ed does ("buy my book, cd, tape, etc.") to questions. We should be able to discuss this openly without fee.

And whether you coined the phrase or not, Comprehensive Grace is defined as "all men are recocilled to God" by the extreme majority. This is universalism. Please let us know what YOU define it as, or to avoid gross misunderstanding, please reconsider changing your terminology.

God Bless
Nate

TRKing's picture

Nate, I appreciate your spirit and your desire to understand more completely. In many ways, I desire the same. One of the things we're not always to the degree we should be is "patient." I know this is frustrating, but I cannot write on the issue (and you'll note I have been consistent with this), until Max finishes his work on Romans 9-11. If I did, then I'd only be saying what I have learned from him (and believe is true at this point) which would not be fair to him prior to his being able to express it himself. As well, I would not and could not do it the justice of a large volume--we'd be lacking so much background information that is necessary in order to understand the point of view. The only reason why I coined the term "Comprehensive Grace" to begin with was because I understand where our studies are leading and what we're seeing in the Book of Romans and don't want it defined by a term that refers to something other than that...which is life apart from Christ. The entire Comprehensive Grace subject will, as I said in the interview, seek to "bracket" the discussion of all the loaded terms we use today, back into its fist century setting. Then, people are free to determine to what degree this impacts people today, whether broadly or in a restrictive sense. We're doing the very best we can to move this discussion forward and yet respect some of the present restraints that we have. We only ask that others do the same. Again, thanks for your work and God bless.

chrisliv's picture

Well,

Although I haven't looked very closely, Presence Ministries does have a website that seems full of articles on several topics, including information that may or may not help clarify questions regarding Grace.

http://www.presence.tv/cms/index.shtml

And, if Presence Ministries is similar to Restoration Ministries, where Tim King seems to also be involved, then it may have a lot to offer. I've looked a little closer at the Restoration Ministries website and noticed some bright stuff.

http://www.restorationgj.com/

Peace to you all,
C. Livingstone

TRKing's picture

The Tim King of Restoration Ministries is NOT the same Tim King of Presence Ministries International. I (Tim King of Presence Ministries International) was made aware of the "other" Tim King a few years back in a letter I recieved from John Bray. He suggested that I begin signing everything with my full name: Timothy R. King
Shortly thereafter, I received a copy of the preterist document entitled, "9.5 Thesis." This was a document that I did not sign for many reasons. However, sure enough, there was my name...Timothy R. King, Colorado.
Perhaps since both Tim King's now live in Colorado, and since evidently both of us are Timothy R. King, we could flip a coin and stick with Tim King for one of us and Timothy R. King for the other. AND, perhaps "some" in the preterist movement will cease getting the "Other" Tim King to sign documents that THIS Tim King has no interest in signing...and that have caused me no few problems. We'll see. As for the other Tim King, I've not met him but somehow find myself liking him already! Ha.
God bless,
Tim

chrisliv's picture

Gee,

That's interesting about the two of you in the same basic area.

Peace,
Christian

davo's picture

Virgil and Tim, thanks for sharing your thoughts with us. There certainly has been much sharing of thoughts on this site around the area of CG, mine included. I would say a good many comments have gone beyond what the context of where I see the basic tenets of CG are i.e., …proponents of Comprehensive Grace seek to re-frame the entire issue of salvation by placing it back into its first-century, covenantal setting… To my knowledge Tim coined the phrase "comprehensive grace" and so best can say what it is and isn't saying. This is one reason why I've used the term "fulfilled grace" in recent times when engaged in this discussion, as the whole CG issue seems to have grown a life of its own and gone beyond a "first-century, covenantal setting." So when sharing my thoughts on fulfilled grace I'm sharing what I see IMO as the effects of that which was established in that first century covenantal setting.

Again, it is great to see such diversity of thoughts, ideas and flavours in the fulfilled camp – it makes for interesting times :)

davo

pretgirlinca's picture

Well, since this came up I suppose I too will add my thoughts.

When I first heard about who was on the agenda at this years conference I was very excited. It looked hopeful that perhaps some history was being left in the past and we truly were going to move ahead.

I was pretty disappointed to find that this is not going to be the case.

I have had the pleasure of meeting Tim King. I had only been on my Preterist Journey for a few months and he graciously offered to meet with me. Although I cannot fully wrap my brain around CG,(neither can I discount it) the strides Presence Ministries is making, is certainly something to take note of.

I am looking forward to seeing Tim again and hearing what he has to say.

I also was looking forward to meeting Ed Stevens. I am one of those people who is not convinced the rapture didn’t happen and very much wanted to hear what Ed Stevens had to say.

More than anything, I wanted to look at my brothers, leaders in their various rights sit in harmony with one another. Walking in the Love He commanded us to walk in.

Ed Stevens wrote:

1. I do not wish to be on the same program with someone who publicly teaches Annihilationism and seems to be leaning toward some form of Universalism (which I view as "another gospel"), and who has failed to clarify (at least to my satisfaction) how his doctrine of "comprehensive grace" is different than Universalism.

2. I do not wish to be on the same program with someone who has done (and seemingly continues to do) so much against me and other preterists, and who has not (as far as I am aware) made any significant effort to correct those things, nor work toward reconciliation and restitution, even though I and others have made it clear that we are willing to work on it together with him.

As an outsider looking in, all of this sounds to me, like sour grapes. An excuse really. This time it’s Tim King, who will it be next time? Are we to alienate ourselves from everyone who doesn’t see things the way we do?

It seems to be that there are personal issues standing in the way of progress. Ed, it’s people like me who you are really hurting, I can assure you. I am not alone.

I don’t mean to sound judgmental, I know many waters have passed under the bridges and there are many many details of which I haven’t clue about. BUT, it makes me feel like a kid who has to pick sides and it’s unproductive.

It would be my desire (and many more just like me) to see the Ed Stevens and the Don Prestons lay down the “doctrinal” differences and personal biases and get about the business of promoting the Kingdom as they believe it to be.

Let those that listen decide for themselves. We need to come together not splinter off.

And there you have it from my perspective.

Blessings,
Julie

Virgil's picture

Julie, Julie...you silly :) You are not supposed to actually "name names"...but since you actually brought up Ed Steven's name, let's deal with the issue at hand one item at a time. Before that, let me provide some facts about Ed's modus operandi.

Last year, Jack Scott, another dear brother in Christ, and if I may add, AN EXCELLENT SPEAKER, if not MY FAVORITE speaker who will also speak at TruthVoice 2004 was to speak at John Anderson's conference on the topic of "The Immortality of the Soul" - now, according to Ed Stevens, Jack Scott is supposedly an "annihilationist" inspite the fact that Jack never spoke or wrote anything to indicate this. Because of this, Ed sent out mass e-mails encouraging both speakers and possible attendees to boycott the conference!! The exact same thing is happening this year with TruthVoice 2004!! This is a pattern with Ed Stevens! The problem is that all 3 points presented by Ed in the message you quoted are false...

1. Tim King never publicly taught annihilationism or any form of it. I want anyone that has some evidence to prove otherwise to provide it and prove me wrong. I do not consider annihilationism to be an issue of heresy anyways, so even if that was the case, this is not an issue in my book. Concerning "some form of universalism", Tim stated in this interview without any question that HE IS NOT a universalist, nor does he subscribe to any form of universalism. Ed is again wrong...

2. In this second point, Ed states that Tim King never made any attempt to reconcile personal issues with him. This is in fact a lie! Both myself and Terry Hall (my father in law) have gone to great lengths for the last several months to provide an avenue for Ed Stevens and Tim King to meet here in Dayton and reconcile their differences. Tim King, while displaying the spirit of Christ, gave us a carte blanche in regards to the terms of any meeting, but every time we attempted to negotiate such a reconciliation meeting, Ed Stevens added new demands to the list, so that it got to the point of being absolutely ridiculous! Tim will come to Dayton to speak at the conference, not to spend several full days meeting with Ed on the ridiculous terms set by him. Ed saying that Tim has not made any attempt to reconcile is absolutely not true because of my personal involvement in the reconciliation process! How can there be no attempt when we ourselves attempted to negotiate the reconciliation but Ed made it impossible to happen? The exact opposite of what Ed claims is the case....he is the one refusing to meet with Tim!

3. You left out a third point which Ed made, which is also false. Ed insinuated something that is absolute not true - if you contact me privately, I would be happy to give you details.

My problem with this is not that Ed is refusing to speak "on the same podium" with Tim...that's just Ed. My problem is that people out there read Ed's messages and make uninformed decisions based not on facts, but on what Ed says! This is why Tim answered some very pointed questions, which amazingly still do not satisfy some people!! It is absolutely incredible to read that Tim King says "I am NOT a universalist" and immediately below to read comments from individuals saying "yes you are". It makes absolutely no sense!

Thank you for your open mind and willingeness to see the truth! I didn't see your name on the list of attendees, so make sure you signup soon :) I am looking forward to meeting you!

In Christ's Kingdom,

Virgil Vaduva

pretgirlinca's picture

Virgil, Virgil, Virgil. I tried not using names, really I did, but it just sounded so cheesy. Everything in quotation marks.....besides, here is how I see it.

We are all in a very unique position. We can either take this time and opportunity and use it for the good of everybody, or we can try and harness this opportunity and use it for personal gain.

As I stated before, when all is said and done and without knowing all the particulars, when someone like me see's this "friction" played out, that's ultimately what it looks like.

I have been discussing these things with many of the "silent" preterists, people who just want to walk out this life with the truth and knowledge we feel we have been blessed with but already, the wheels of power and politics are turning. Soon this movement will either become stagnant or preverted unless "we" all keep each other accountable.
To do that, we are going to have be open and longsuffering with each other as we allow each other to walk out their own salvation. Knowing before hand, that is not going to look the same as it has in the past.

We are all a small part of a very big picture. It's not about you and it's not about me it's about us, ALL of us and I expect the men and women who step up to the plate to have a real firm grasp on that, otherwise......it might get ugly. :)

As for the conference, if I still believed Satan was around yanking my chain I could blame the delay on him. I've been going back and forth with who's coming and who's not. I think as of last night I got a firm number, so look for me on your list, I'll be there by tonight!

Peace to you all,
Julie

Virgil's picture

Julie,

Well said. Right now, there are certain people in the preterist movement who want to have complete control of where it is heading. This is extremely dangerous. Preterism cannot, and WILL NOT have a pope...it's simply impossible! You cannot have it Ed's way or the highway - the vast majority of people silently laugh-off Ed's idea of a physical rapture taking place in A.D. 70, but none of us publicly rebuked him and encouraged boycotts of his ministry. Ed's view of the resurrection of the dead is highly suspicious...in fact in my opinion it makes Ed very much a partial preterist and it denies the covenantal fulfillment of grace and life at the fall of the temple, but I never heard any one of us criticizing him or denigrating him publicly for what he believes. You see, if one is to get technical, just these two views are much closer to heresy than annihilationism for example. But he is free in Christ to believe in a physical rapture and a future resurrection of believers, if he so chooses.

You see, the main reason for interviewing Tim King was to hear things from his own mouth, not Ed's mouth. The truth needs to be brought to light and lies and rumors need to be exposed to the whole world. Yes, it's ugly and nasty, but honestly, it needs to be seen, and the authors need to be held accountable, just as you suggested.

Right now, us, the young generation are the only hope for preterism. We need to wrestle it from the hands of the controlling old-timers and use it to unite the body of Christ, not to divide it. If preterism does not make Virgil or Ed better people then what is it good for?

I say, let's change our attitudes, and make others WANT to know what preterism is all about, because we are different people...we are not like the rest of them, on the outside looking bored. There is still plenty of hope.

Unless we step up to the plate and head preterism in the right direction, we will fail. We need to use our understanding of covenant eschatology to create a comprehensive world-view that makes people want to hang out with us....not hold their noses when they pass by. :)

Seeker's picture

Tim can easily deny being a Universalist because he defines it differently than most of us. To him a Universalist is "everyone is going to heaven/will be saved regardless of Jesus". He doesn't believe that. IMHO he believes everyone will "go to heaven/be saved" through Jesus. The problem is that most of us still see that as Universalism. So to many preterists he can still be a "Universalist" even though he claims he's not.

I also think you're accusing Ed of some falsehoods that he did not commit. Just because someone has never written down "I am an annihilationist" doesn't mean they aren't one. I'm many things that I've never actually "written down". Ed calls it as he sees it and that is good. He's honest with himself and others instead of trying to walk on egg shells and please everyone.

Seeker

Seeker

Virgil's picture

Rick,

I am not accusing anyone of anything...I am presenting facts concerning individuals who choose to purposefully misrepresent reality so that it furthers their personal vendettas while creating severe division in the body of Christ. You were not personally involved in some of these events, so I don't see how you can say I am accusing anyone of "falsehoods they did not commit" - what does that mean anywas?

And how can you tell me what Tim believes when he specifically said that he didn't believe "everyone" will go to heaven? Who should I believe, Tim himself, or someone telling me what someone told him about what Tim believes?

You also said "Ed calls it as he sees it and that is good. He's honest with himself and others instead of trying to walk on egg shells and please everyone."

I also call it as I see it..and I see it as I already mentioned above. So what if someone subscribes to annihilationism? What does that have to do with encouraging people to not attend a preterist conference where the topic has nothing to do with annihilationism? I also refuse to walk on eggshels and run my list of speakers by certain people begging for their approval. I owe no man anything, and my only goal is to serve God, promote unity, and biblical truth and understanding about his word. It's just that simple...maybe too simple for some. Per Titus 3, things are set up in a certain order by the scripture:

“Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.”

Seeker's picture

Virgil,

Calm down:)

You said:
according to Ed Stevens, Jack Scott is supposedly an "annihilationist" inspite the fact that Jack never spoke or wrote anything to indicate this.

My point is just because Jack has never written anything that you're aware of doesn't mean he is not an annihilationist. I'm sure Ed has good reasons and sources for saying that. I am an annihilationist to a certain extent. I don't believe in eternal punishing.

You said:
The problem is that all 3 points presented by Ed in the message you quoted are false

That is an accusation that is false.

You also said:
2. In this second point, Ed states that Tim King never made any attempt to reconcile personal issues with him. This is in fact a lie! Both myself and Terry Hall (my father in law) have gone to great lengths for the last several months to provide an avenue for Ed Stevens and Tim King to meet here in Dayton and reconcile their differences. Tim King, while displaying the spirit of Christ, gave us a carte blanche in regards to the terms of any meeting, but every time we attempted to negotiate such a reconciliation meeting, Ed Stevens added new demands to the list, so that it got to the point of being absolutely ridiculous! Tim will come to Dayton to speak at the conference, not to spend several full days meeting with Ed on the ridiculous terms set by him. Ed saying that Tim has not made any attempt to reconcile is absolutely not true because of my personal involvement in the reconciliation process! How can there be no attempt when we ourselves attempted to negotiate the reconciliation but Ed made it impossible to happen? The exact opposite of what Ed claims is the case....he is the one refusing to meet with Tim!

This is not an attempt by Tim to reconcile. This is an attempt by you and your Father-in-law to reconcile the two of them, so you can see why Ed would say this.

I'm not upset; I enjoy this site, but this whole thing about CG not being Universalism is a little ridiculous. You're defending a position that can't be defended no matter what Tim may call it.

Seeker

Seeker

Virgil's picture

My point is just because Jack has never written anything that you're aware of doesn't mean he is not an annihilationist. I'm sure Ed has good reasons and sources for saying that. I am an annihilationist to a certain extent. I don't believe in eternal punishing.

Well that's a wrongly positioned point. Ed is telling people that Jack and Tim are publicly teaching annihilationism when both of them are not talking about the topic in public.

This is not an attempt by Tim to reconcile. This is an attempt by you and your Father-in-law to reconcile the two of them, so you can see why Ed would say this.

There is a lot more to this than it needs to be said in public, and if I was you, I wouln't rush to defend Ed Stevens' position as fast as you are doing. This issue has almost nothing to do with Comprehensive Grace or annihilationism. Is about stubborn people putting their personal agendas in front of everything else while antagonizing and dividing the preterist camp to no end.

Randude's picture

Well stated! I don't always agree with all of the insights I hear, but that doesn't mean we should shut someone up that we do not agree with. I'm glad that Tim has cleared up some of the mis-information by agreeing to do the interview.

1Jn 3:14
"We know that we have passed out of death into life because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death."

Malachi's picture

It is interesting to me that Jack Scott, Don Preston, and many, many others have broken off all formal association with Presence Ministries because of the direction it has taken in recent years, for example, placing a Catholic priest on its board. Although Tim may not be a universalist, it is clear that PMI has taken some twists and turns along the way, leaving a lot of folks (myself included) very uncomfortable and uncertain about where it stands and where it is headed on many issues.

Virgil's picture

Oh no!! A Catholic?? BJ did you hear that? :)

JayGary's picture

How can you be sure in talking about these various personalities that you are not falling into the very carnal trap that Paul admonished the Corinthians to avoid? by saying I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, no, I am of Christ.

Related to your second charge, I've been a board member of Presence for five years and have yet to vote up or down a resolution that would place a "Catholic priest" on its board of directors.

Are you refering to Elias Chacour, who served on the Presence magazine advisory board? He was a guest columnist in 2001, speaking out again justifying apartheid against Palestinians in Zion's name. His name is Elias Chacour, a Melkite priest from Galilee, a president of a college. Melkites are not affliated with Rome or Constantinople. In fact, Chacour once went to Rome, and challenged them, saying the gospel first came from Galilee. He is a descendent of the first followers of Jesus, and Presence was honored to have the equivalent of Bishop Tutu in the Holy Land identified with its work.

How you can you be sure that God is merely in your box? I see God at work outside the box, in the destitute Palestinian villages of northern Galilee where Chacour lifts the brokenhearted.

You feel "uncomfortable and uncertain" about PMI's directions. That is your right to declare, but it is your story.

I sit in a different place. The challenge of the book of Hebrews was to experience God outside the box, outside the camp, outside the Mosaic coventions. Give me one good reason why I should following any "preterist" convention, if I feel this old scaffolding is growing old and falling away?

David refused to wear Saul's armor. Presence represents thousands of people that are beyond playing church games, but are genuinely involved in reinventing biblical faith to create the communities of tommorrow. Give me one biblical reason why I should put new wine in old wineskins?

--Jay Gary, jay(at)jaygary.com

Jay Gary, Helping Faith Communities Cultivate Foresight, http://www.jaygary.com

Virgil's picture

Yet another example of misinformation concerning Presence Ministries...thanks for the clarification Jay. Even if you had a catholic on your board, I would actually applaud you. We opened our arms here on PP to several preterist catholics and we've had very interesting (to say the least) discussions.

Let me make it clear publicly, that Preterism does not reject Catholics as a previous post insinuated! We love our Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox brothers, and we are hoping that through the power of covenant eschatology, you will be able to challenge the spiritually dead leaders in your churches and revitalize your churches...and make them aware of Christ's presence. This is why Planet Preterist has been involved in translating James Stuart Russell's "The Parousia" into Romanian where it is now being distributed free of charge to many Greek Orthodox priests and other evangelical leaders in the hope of providing "unity" rather than divion, hoping that preterism will serve as a liaison between the various faiths, not as a dividing line as some apparently want to use it.

TRKing's picture

A CATHOLIC PRIEST ON ITS BOARD??????????

This is incredible! There is no Catholic Priest on our board? What are you talking about? Where did you get this?

This is exactly the type of divisive rumor-mongering that has caused Presence Ministries International to go its own way and mind its own business.

Brothers, please, stop the insanity. This is not a game. People have posted above and shared how they are hurting--can we not lay aside our ego's and desire to be Martin Luther II long enough to just be compassionate and loving?

For over 30 years all we have done is lead. We don't check which way the wind is blowing before we act and we don't try to "build" an audience or "steal" from the audience of others. We just want the truth and if the entire world disagrees with us, that's okay. We are bent on truth...speaking of which, where is the truth in saying we have a Catholic Priest on our board???

Malachi's picture

Apparently, I am referring to Elias Chacour, according to Gary Jay, a Melkite priest. If he was not on the board of Presence Ministries, he was placed upon the board of the magazine. Christ's is the only priesthood. The substance having come, the shadows have past away. To claim a continuing priesthood of men is an implicit denial of the priesthood of Christ. That is why Christians from and after the Reformation avoid use of the term "priest" - it is unscriptural. I certainly am not a "follower" of the other named individuals, and mention them only to point out that, as PMI has changed direction, it has lost a goodly number of its prior supporters. It is not they that have changed, but PMI. Hence, we are justified in asking "What is going on at PMI?"
May I say this, also? That one can visit any number of Preterist web sites and one immediately understands that he is at a site that is exploring and expounding a particular school of CHRISTIAN eschatology. However, when visiting the PMI web site one gets the impression he has entered a very undefined area; neither Christian nor pagan nor new age; a strange mix of pop psychology, Christianity, and the wisdom of man. Indeed, one feels as if PMI is attempting to create a whole new religion! I do not say this with malice; it is clear others are under similar impression. Sometime ago, PMI decided to stop being merely an expounder of Preterist eschatology and to synthisize Preterism into a holistic philosophy of human life and existence. Hence, today many of us are uncertain if PMI is even in the "box" of Christianity. We encounter strange language like "cross event" (this is the language of scripture?) and "Comprhensive Grace" and wonder just what is going on. I have always found Tim and Max to be very kind and helpful. I hope this is received in the same spirit. Brethren, we love you and are indebted to you for your contribution to Preterism, but we do not like the new face of PMI!

Virgil's picture

Sometime ago, PMI decided to stop being merely an expounder of Preterist eschatology and to synthisize Preterism into a holistic philosophy of human life and existence. Hence, today many of us are uncertain if PMI is even in the "box" of Christianity.

These are pretty strong words - are you implying that taking theology and making a philosophical or social application of it is a bad thing and makes people wonder about your "christianity"? This goes against everything Christ and the disciples taught!

I guess with this mentality, preterism must have no impact on how you live your life and how you relate to other humans. This is why, such preterists will continue to have zero effect on their environment and society because they are stuck in a box they do not want to come out of. This is old-school preterism, where people sit around and argue all day over minute theological aspects.

It's time for you to come to terms with the fact that we have decided to take preterism into a new direction. We will use preterism to unite Christians, not to divide them; to make people be better neighbors, not only better theologians, and to make the world better so that Christ's glory shines through us. If these are not the things your preterism encourages you to do, then I don't like your preterism.

TRKing's picture

Virgil, I appreciate your words. I think that one area where PMI gets takes a great deal of criticism, is its willingness to hold dialogue with so many people outside of the conventional norms of so many who desire to remain within tradional orthodoxies--perhaps this is what Malachi is struggling with as well (I don't know). It IS a philosophical "thing" with us--we believe that things don't get changed through debate as much as by taking the long road of building personal relationships. For 2000 years Christendom has taken the "conversionist" path in ways that have, at times, actually hindered bringing others into an understanding that Jesus is indeed the name above all names and that no one shall be reconciled to God apart from him. PMI chooses to believe that we can't argue that into anybody's head as effectively as we can help them see it by choosing to embrace them or love them into conformity. The most powerful element in the universe is love. Why? Because God is love.
Our understanding of how His love is to be played out is that it must impact and be taken to all arenas of the Public Square. So we embrace and love and dialogue with numerous people of numerous faiths and philosopies whether they agree with us or not--but here is the point--at least we get a seat at the table. In what seat do the exclusionists sit? Who will more readily impact those with whom we differ--those who embrace them or those who stay separate?
To say that one may go to the PMI website and come away thinking that we no longer make biblical understanding our primary focus is beyond me. We'll put our biblical teaching and scholarship alongside that of anybody else...it will stand the test of time. However, we will take that theology and break it down into discussion with all of those made in the image of God. After all, it was his goal that they all might be saved (John 3:17). Until my last breath, I'll do all I can to reach those people that they might know the way, the truth and the life.
27% of our culture today is called the "cultural creatives." PMI is intentionally extending a hand to them. If preterism doesn't have a word for those folks only because they are "different," then preterism needs to awaken to the inclusive love of God.

davo's picture

TRKing: If preterism doesn't have a word for those folks only because they are "different," then preterism needs to awaken to the inclusive love of God.

TRKing: So we embrace and love and dialogue with numerous people of numerous faiths and philosopies whether they agree with us or not--but here is the point--at least we get a seat at the table. In what seat do the exclusionists sit?

That's the whole problem Tim, "what seat" - the seat of judgment - looking down one's nose. Well not for me, I'm with you Tim :)

davo

Virgil's picture

Tim, what is funny about all this is that right after I read the comments about Presence Ministries having a Catholic priest on its board (which even if it was true, I would actually applaud such a decision), my father who lives in Romania contacted me and told me he just finished spending several hours of great discussion with the Greek Orthodox priest in town. Of course most of the discussion involved fulfilled prophecy and theology, but here is an example where a correct application of preterism brings two radically opposed christians together...and I imagine, if there is such a thing, brings also a smile on God's face.

Should we take the position that divisive attitudes are better, this would have not happened. How hard can someone's heart be to not see that unity brings reconciliation and truth to light?

Malachi's picture

If I have overstated the case about the changes at PMI, I apologize. They were made to be constructively helpful, not unhelpfull critical, or, at least, should have been. Apparently a fair number of people have felt similar apprehensions. I was merely trying to express them so Tim and Max could help assuage these concerns and take nesessary action. Negative feedback is a part of life and leadership. It is the nature of these message boards to sometimes fail to speak as carefully as one ought. Sorry if I failed to season my speech with sufficient love to make it more easily received. However, I do stand by the statement that PMI does not look like other preterist web sites and gives the impression that "transmillennialism"is being positioned as if it were a whole new religious philosophy, not a just an interpretative approach to Biblical eschatology or the "millennium" of Revelation twenty. Naturally, ideas have consequences and it is inevitible that Preterism impact human lives and institutions. However, it is Christianity that restores man's hope, not "transmillennialism."

Roderick's picture

This is old-school preterism, where people sit around and argue all day over minute theological aspects.
Actually this is old-school Christianity. I would argue it is left over compulsory conversionism wherein people were forced to believe. (Which is not what Jesus taught) I would also argue that anyone who still holds this concept missed the boat on what preterism (old-school or new-school preterism) is even about. Now, I'm certain our brother here is thinking out loud and just pushing the buttons to make sure PMI is really worthwhile. I want him to feel welcome to continue in his examination. I applaud people who are not so quick to jump after a thing. I am certain he will eventually see the benefit of the various approaches.
Ultimately, may Christ be glorified while the rest of us grasshoppers stop jumping around and be awe-struck by His majesty.

Roderick

Recent comments

Poll

Should we allow Anonymous users to comment on Planet Preterist articles?
Yes absolutely
23%
No only registered users should comment
77%
What are you talking about?
0%
Total votes: 43