 |
|
|
"the Rapture in March of the 2000"
-- Ephraim
|
|
| |
by Virgil Vaduva
For the past few years, Preterism has been steadily growing into a force to be reckoned with, so much so that it has come under attack by not only Tim LaHaye and his friends (see End Times Controversy) but also from insiders unwilling to take Preterism into uncharted waters. These insiders continue to view Preterism as a “reactionary” movement rather than a “world-changing” and “age-transcending” movement. At TruthVoice 2004, The Road Ahead, PlanetPreterist took this problem head-on and openly discussed the problems resulting from viewing Preterism as a stagnant theological movement.
In his keynote address at TruthVoice 2004 titled “The Road Ahead: Road Signs and Compasses,” Tim King dealt with thorny issues that we all face today as Preterists, chiefly the issue of Modern Christianity being almost completely unable to emerge into a Postmodern age. This issue permeates most Christian churches and movements today, including Preterism. As some of our readers know, we faced some of these issues a year ago during the preparations for TruthVoice 2004 when certain individuals unleashed vicious attacks on PlanetPreterist for allowing Tim to be the keynote speaker at TruthVoice 2004. Some of these details were outlined in an interview I had with Tim. (click to read interview) We stood firm by our decision to have Tim be our keynote speaker and we were greatly blessed by his presentation. Tim’s vision for a new kind of Christian fits perfectly in my own mission to use Preterism as a tool to unite Christians of many faiths again into one undivided group of believers, a Church with a positive view of the future, a Church that can continue to shine in this world and in Christ’s Kingdom.
A year has passed and TruthVoice 2005 is not far from us. Our theme for 2005 is “Preterism, A Generous Orthodoxy.” We will discuss how Preterism can change one’s view of traditional orthodoxy. We will attempt to show why believers, especially Preterists, need to adopt a generous Orthodoxy and abandon the preconceived and judgmental attitudes of the Modern age. In some way, this will be a smooth continuation of last years “Road Ahead” theme.
I have heard of Preterists talking about other Preterists’ beliefs and labeling them “heresies.” How ironic! Us, the heretics, find time to call each other heretics because we differ on theological matters such as millennialism, resurrection, rapture, universalism and annihilationism. TruthVoice 2005 will stay above this petty infighting. Preterism itself needs to stay above it, and rather swiftly move to answer the many questions of a thirsty emerging generation of Christians. Should we fail to do so, we will be left in the dust, the way Dispensationalism is being left behind right now (no pun intended).
This year, TruthVoice 2005 is free of charge. Please join us to learn more from us, and teach us something we may not know. Join us for fellowships and friendships that can last a lifetime.
With all these thoughts in mind, you can now watch last year’s keynote address by Tim King. The file is rather large, so we only recommend this for users with broadband access (DSL, Cable or faster). Right-mouse click on the link below, and choose “Save-As” to save the file on your computer and play it with your Windows Media Player.
Watch TruthVoice 2004 Keynote Address "The Road Ahead: Road Signs and Compasses" by Tim King(Windows Media Player Required)
------
Virgil Vaduva is a columnist for PlanetPreterist.com.
View Virgil Vaduva archives
Note: Opinions presented on PlanetPreterist.com or by PlanetPreterist.com columnists may not necessarily reflect the position of PlanetPreterist.com, or reflect the beliefs, doctrine or theological position of all other preterists. We encourage all readers to first and foremost carefully analyze all articles in the light of God's Word.
|
| |
|
|
Average Score: 3.66
Votes: 3
 |
|
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: The Road Ahead to a Generous Orthodoxy (Score: 1)
 by MichaelB on Tuesday, April 26 @ 13:05:04 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | | Virgil - do you believe that there is such thing as heresy ??? |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by MichaelB on Tuesday, April 26 @ 13:09:05 PDT
- by Virgil on Tuesday, April 26 @ 15:11:34 PDT
- by Writerx on Tuesday, April 26 @ 18:19:34 PDT
- by Virgil on Tuesday, April 26 @ 18:30:03 PDT
- by Nomosonomy on Wednesday, April 27 @ 07:04:53 PDT
- by JL on Wednesday, April 27 @ 08:10:46 PDT
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 27 @ 08:18:31 PDT
- by JL on Wednesday, April 27 @ 14:01:27 PDT
Re: The Road Ahead to a Generous Orthodoxy (Score: 1)
by jfarley on Tuesday, April 26 @ 16:56:02 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | What is with the desire to become a “world-changing” and “age-transcending” movement? This was accomplished quite well by God in the first century though the outward appearance was often what you characterise as undesirable.
What good has Orthodoxy ever been to anyone? Orthodox Jews rejected the Messiah, Orthodox Catholics perverted the concept of the church, Orthodox Protestants are only different, not better. Will we ever figure out that God is not interested in our efforts to build something for Him? It's about individual people with their hearts set on Him.
I would agree that the H word is thrown around much too loosely but I'd rather be called a heretic anyday than to be told that it's all good, when with God it certainly is not.
Dispensationalism is not being left behind because of petty infighting either, when it finally is gone it will be because it was wrong from start to finish and all efforts to prop it up will have been exhausted. Preterism is fine without ever becoming Orthodox and it will only become perverted by embracing your vision. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Tuesday, April 26 @ 17:06:04 PDT
- by jfarley on Tuesday, April 26 @ 18:26:31 PDT
- by Virgil on Tuesday, April 26 @ 18:49:54 PDT
- by jfarley on Tuesday, April 26 @ 19:57:10 PDT
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 27 @ 05:40:18 PDT
- by nate4onenation on Monday, May 02 @ 12:15:30 PDT
Re: The Road Ahead to a Generous Orthodoxy (Score: 1)
 by davo on Tuesday, April 26 @ 18:38:45 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) |
Never mind Virgil, you get that ^ when you strike a nerve :). Anyway, thanks for putting up that link to Tim's presentation, I found it most informative.
davo – pantelism.com – |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Tuesday, April 26 @ 19:01:55 PDT
- by jfarley on Tuesday, April 26 @ 20:28:03 PDT
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 27 @ 05:44:45 PDT
Re: The Road Ahead to a Generous Orthodoxy (Score: 1)
 by JeffE on Tuesday, April 26 @ 22:05:42 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | | I kind of like the sound of being an Orthodox Christian. I am new to preterism, so by attending Truthvoice this year, I hope I can learn a little more about how to live, now that I see we are in the Presence of Christ each day. This site has become my "church." I am sick of seeing the complete Left Behind series in my local church library and eating communion "till He comes." |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
Re: The Road Ahead to a Generous Orthodoxy (Score: 1)
by SuperSoulFighter on Tuesday, April 26 @ 22:36:48 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Virgil, my friend...I am interested. I am interested in the conclusions drawn at the TruthVoice 2005 Conference, and how these are developed from those voiced at the 2004 Conference.
As modern Christians, we love conferences, meetings, a meeting of minds and hearts on a more personal, intimate, face-to-face level and we love the speaker/audience format. It's a Western cultural thing, and I don't have a huge problem with it per se - except for two things. We need to ride a razor's edge as Preterists, as we assist modern Christians to successfully emerge into the post-modern "world" with their faith intact. On the one hand, we must avoid being so dogmatic and and formulaic that we dictate terms of belief as a form of "new orthodoxy" (with our own Creeds, etc.), while on the other, we need to avoid an all-inclusive ecumenism that sacrifices both our distinctive hermeneutics AND our exclusive eschatology. When I refer to our eschatology as "exclusive", of course, I am emphasizing the fact that ONLY ONE understanding of Christ's Parousia/Second Coming/Return is accurate. Out of the myriad views and beliefs in existence surrounding this event, ONLY ONE is true to God's revelation of the fulfillment of all Biblical prophecy and full establishment of His Kingdom.
We cannot sacrifice our distinctives on the altar of convenience (and I think you know that). Our "generous orthdoxy" cannot be so generous that we welcome futurists who insist on maintaining their futurist perspective in the face of very clear, unequivocal Scriptural evidence against their position. Those futurists who demonstrate a willingness to openly and forthrightly reconsider the fundamentals of certain key, core beliefs to which they hold are the ones to which we should devote our time and energy, in assisting them to see and understand our perspective in as clear a light as possible. There are those who have been prevented from entering in, fully, to their true Kingdom experience through flawed, false teaching and doctrine courtesy of the post-AD 70 "church". These deserve the opportunity to respond to the true Biblical understanding of the Kingdom of Heaven as God originally intended to communicate it. There are others, on the other hand, who will reject our position out of hand, because they love "the lie". They love the idea of Christ Jesus returning physically to restore the planet to a paradise state, etc. etc. It's a defeatist, lazy mentality fostered by futurism, but many people have grown to love it, and won't take kindly to our whipping the rug out from under their pet eschatological doctrine (as we know all too well).
Ultimately, again, it is God's work to directly interact with individuals, as they respond either positively or negatively to His Truth. I think a true, "generous orthodoxy" is best expressed internally, amongst ourselves, as Full Preterists. Again, I'm interested in reviewing the conclusions and perspectives derived from this Conference.
Voicing the Truth with you,
John McPherson |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 27 @ 06:11:43 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Wednesday, April 27 @ 12:44:20 PDT
- by Parker on Thursday, April 28 @ 19:11:28 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Friday, April 29 @ 22:27:28 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Saturday, April 30 @ 15:25:44 PDT
Re: The Road Ahead to a Generous Orthodoxy (Score: 1)
by MichaelB on Wednesday, April 27 @ 08:38:10 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Virgil - I simply asked if heresies exist - I didn't ask you to "vilify" them.
So if someone insists that universalism is tru even though the bible claims that there was a group of people that would NEVER RECEIVE THE INHERITANCE...
Is that a heresy ??? And why would somonene want to hold to an idea if it was found not to be biblical ??? |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by MichaelB on Wednesday, April 27 @ 09:15:04 PDT
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 27 @ 10:06:46 PDT
- by MichaelB on Wednesday, April 27 @ 11:59:40 PDT
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 27 @ 12:10:38 PDT
- by MichaelB on Wednesday, April 27 @ 13:27:58 PDT
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 27 @ 14:12:48 PDT
- by MichaelB on Wednesday, April 27 @ 15:34:57 PDT
- by MichaelB on Wednesday, April 27 @ 15:39:21 PDT
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 27 @ 17:22:05 PDT
- by Jer on Thursday, April 28 @ 07:28:25 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, April 28 @ 09:06:33 PDT
Re: The Road Ahead to a Generous Orthodoxy (Score: 1)
by MichaelB on Wednesday, April 27 @ 08:52:42 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | JL - writes: And when we go back, we have to make strong cases for each of these alternative views. Anything less is a strawman, a false argument.
I agree JL - we need to re-examine doctrines in light of Preterism. However - what I am afraid of is that people are "throwing out the baby with the bathwater" so to speak. Insisting that because the early church fathers were wrong about some things that they must have been wrong about everything. Not really making "STRONG ARGUMENTS" but instead using a mistake by the early church as a license to make up whatever dooctrines make them feel good.
Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).
"Zeal without doctrine is like a sword in the hand of a lunatic" - John Calvin
Mike Bennett
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by JL on Wednesday, April 27 @ 14:54:44 PDT
- by MichaelB on Wednesday, April 27 @ 15:15:41 PDT
- by JL on Wednesday, April 27 @ 16:54:13 PDT
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 27 @ 17:57:44 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Sunday, May 01 @ 10:39:46 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Sunday, May 01 @ 12:19:03 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Sunday, May 01 @ 13:12:45 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Sunday, May 01 @ 14:55:29 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Sunday, May 01 @ 14:59:36 PDT
- by vento on Monday, May 02 @ 13:12:33 PDT
- by forgivenone2002 on Sunday, May 08 @ 15:06:31 PDT
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 27 @ 17:38:57 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, April 28 @ 08:09:32 PDT
- by Virgil on Thursday, April 28 @ 09:46:41 PDT
Re: The Road Ahead to a Generous Orthodoxy (Score: 1)
by Ozark on Wednesday, April 27 @ 21:47:41 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Forgive me for perverting our Lord’s parable a bit, but I hope you see my point.
Two men went to the church house to pray, one a preterist and the other and futurist. The preterist stood praying thus to himself, “I thank thee that I am not like this futurist over there. He does not understand the Bible like I do. He ignores many scriptures and has an inconsistent hermeneutic.
I, on the other hand, have seen the truth of the Lord’s coming. I am free from the lies that this fellow believes. I have a sound understanding of eschatology that can withstand any argument men may offer.”
Not far off the futurist was unable to lift his eyes to heaven, as he cried out, “God be merciful to me a sinner!”
Who went home justified that day?
Here is another question for us. Who knows God better, the heretic who loves his brother or the man with sound doctrine who despises all who disagree with him?
Knowing God is a whole lot bigger than doctrine. There is a higher plane to walk upon than just being right. The goal of Bible study is to find that plane. If our goal is just to be correct, we miss the point entirely.
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by SuperSoulFighter on Thursday, April 28 @ 00:00:22 PDT
- by Ozark on Thursday, April 28 @ 06:39:52 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Thursday, April 28 @ 09:29:06 PDT
- by Ozark on Thursday, April 28 @ 12:11:28 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Thursday, April 28 @ 18:27:56 PDT
- by Virgil on Thursday, April 28 @ 04:24:57 PDT
- by Ozark on Thursday, April 28 @ 06:47:59 PDT
- by Virgil on Thursday, April 28 @ 07:23:51 PDT
- by Ozark on Thursday, April 28 @ 11:31:43 PDT
Re: The Road Ahead to a Generous Orthodoxy (Score: 1)
by jfarley on Wednesday, April 27 @ 22:08:14 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | My above comments, posted yesterday, were too candid, so with this post I hope to express myself in a more thoughtful manner.
I am bothered by the inclination that exists within Preterism to gravitate towards an ecumenical orthodoxy. My first notice of the possibility that this could happen was when I read Samuel Frost's recent article entitled "Saint Athanius and Preterism". I didn't reply to Mr. Frost's article because I was so discusted by it that I just couldn't. I hope it will not seem unfair to Virgil that I address both articles at the same time. It has occurred to me that I may be confusing two separate issues but Virgil did post a very approving comment to that piece and this article at least appears to be in the same vein.
Can we even recognize, in today's humanistic culture, the difference between right and wrong without being negatively labeled for it? Can we do it as Christians? What if affirming biblical truth means denying someone elses long held beliefs? Will a Generous Orthodoxy be able to do this without declaring that other person unorthodox?
I personally don't care about being called that, never did, but it still took me nearly two years to crawl out from under orthodox teachings and be able to see that Christ has already returned. It was only afterward that I realized it was creedal framework that said it couldn't be. And I am not from a creedal type of denomination. It is orthodox "christianity" that has subverted the truth of Christ for nearly two thousand years. Man-made articles of faith passed on in the form of framework, taken seriously by those who wished (or otherwise chose) to belong, and imposed on those with much purer desires. If this were simply a matter of Who's name to be baptised in, I'd have long since laughed it off, but it's the most important truth in Christianity. You disagree with my assessment? Take it up with the orthodox bunch that are teaching that the atonement is not yet complete because that particular Feast is not yet fulfilled. There we not only have subversion, but perversion because of what they say it will mean when Christ does fufill it. Can a preterist affirm that belief to acquire what orthodoxy can give him?
Samuel Frost affirmed praying to Mary, I deny it and and am labeled as having a 19 word syndrome designed to make me feel haughty for my disapproval. How many of you thought it was big of him to call Kenneth Copeland a brother in the Lord? I'm left wondering why Paul couldn't have extended that sort of tolerance to Hymenaeus and Philitus. Did they need something more than theology schooling and correction? Virgil, can you tell me if they were wrong on purpose? Why did he choose to humiliate Peter, a fellow apostle, when he could've just overlooked it, Peter wasn't perfect either. That would have been an option, right?
As this plays out, each of us will choose whether we will participate or not, and I thank God for that right. I just want to post an objection, hopefully a responsible one, because I and all others who oppose this "road" are being minimalized by our wide-minded brothers. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by SuperSoulFighter on Thursday, April 28 @ 00:07:31 PDT
- by JL on Thursday, April 28 @ 06:30:34 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Thursday, April 28 @ 09:25:08 PDT
- by JL on Thursday, April 28 @ 23:03:51 PDT
- by SuperSoulFighter on Friday, April 29 @ 22:05:31 PDT
- by jfarley on Thursday, April 28 @ 11:05:09 PDT
- by Virgil on Thursday, April 28 @ 06:12:02 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, April 28 @ 08:12:04 PDT
- by Virgil on Thursday, April 28 @ 08:26:20 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, April 28 @ 08:55:57 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, April 28 @ 09:13:10 PDT
- by Virgil on Thursday, April 28 @ 09:51:49 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, April 28 @ 10:41:49 PDT
- by Virgil on Thursday, April 28 @ 11:05:59 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, April 28 @ 11:19:29 PDT
- by jfarley on Thursday, April 28 @ 18:11:37 PDT
- by jfarley on Thursday, April 28 @ 21:38:25 PDT
- by Virgil on Friday, April 29 @ 05:32:04 PDT
Re: The Road Ahead to a Generous Orthodoxy (Score: 1)
by davo on Thursday, April 28 @ 09:53:36 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) |
30But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son." 31Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.
MichaelB: The bible is where I get my theology.
Michael, IMO you demonstrate such a "blinkered theology" – you have this notion that non-inheritance equates to either a supposed post mortem destiny of annihilation or eternal conscious torment, take your pick. Conversely, gaining inheritance equates to "going to heaven when you die". However, it was those of the law who could not come into the inheritance of "son-ship" i.e., authority in Christ – the very thing that eternal life established. "Eternal life" being a present reality, this life relationship with God, through faith in Christ.
davo – pantelism.com –
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by MichaelB on Thursday, April 28 @ 10:07:57 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, April 28 @ 10:27:36 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, April 28 @ 10:37:47 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, April 28 @ 11:15:42 PDT
- by JL on Thursday, April 28 @ 13:51:52 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, April 28 @ 15:29:55 PDT
- by Virgil on Thursday, April 28 @ 16:37:35 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, April 28 @ 19:21:16 PDT
- by MichaelB on Thursday, April 28 @ 14:19:39 PDT
- by davo on Thursday, April 28 @ 22:19:56 PDT
- by MichaelB on Friday, April 29 @ 08:25:29 PDT
- by davo on Friday, April 29 @ 19:45:39 PDT
- by MichaelB on Saturday, April 30 @ 12:10:51 PDT
- by davo on Sunday, May 01 @ 09:36:39 PDT
- by MichaelB on Sunday, May 01 @ 21:57:36 PDT
- by davo on Sunday, May 01 @ 22:09:51 PDT
- by MichaelB on Sunday, May 01 @ 22:08:36 PDT
- by davo on Sunday, May 01 @ 22:20:10 PDT
| 
|
