 |
|
|
You don't have a god in you, you are one.
-- Kenneth Copeland, "The Force Of Love" tape # 02-0028
|
|
| |
A Distinguishing Distinction
Posted on Friday, September 15 @ 10:35:26 PDT by Englishman |
|
With the increasing scholarly attention to the claims of preterism it is not at all surprising to see differing shades of eschatological understanding within the Christian community. Initially, the terms “partial preterists” and “full preterists” were employed to designate those major groups who both held to the view of significant historical fulfillments in AD 70 (in contrast to popularized dispensational and futurist views) but who also held differing views regarding the timing and nature of the general resurrection and the timing and scope of final judgment.
Unfortunately, these terms became pejoratives as they were quickly embellished with terms like “consistent preterism” (implying “inconsistent preterism”) and “hyper preterism” (implying outrageously accelerated fulfillment) and even “hymanean preterism” (suggesting heresy for certain fulfillment views of the resurrection.)
Obviously these terms tend to drive a wedge between preterists that would otherwise lead to meaningful study and research.
Just as there are appellations within the Christian community to conveniently identify various soteriological systems (Calvinism, Arminianism, etc.) I am proposing a convenient way to identify the two major persuasions among those Christians who have a significant fulfilled perspective of eschatology.
The proposed appellations are these:
“Olivet Preterism” and “Patriarchal Preterism”.
Neither of the terms are “superior” or “inferior” and certainly not pejorative.
OLIVET PRETERISM
Under the heading of “Olivet Preterism” would be those who hold that the Olivet Discourse speaks of events whose fullfilment was uniquely applicable to the cleansing of Jerusalem in AD 70 and whose occurrence was the sign of the Parousia.
PATRIARCHAL PRETERISM
Under the heading of “Patriarchal Preterism” would be those who hold, as the Olivet Preterists do, that the Olivet Discourse speaks of events whose fulfilment was uniquely applicable to the cleansing of Jerusalem in AD 70 and whose occurrence was the sign of the Parousia. It would also include those preterists who assert that the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob have already been raised from the dead.
DETAILS
The term “sign of the Parousia” is employed (rather than simply “Parousia”) in order to preserve the fact that there is a difference between a “sign” and its “substance”.
These definitions say nothing about a “resurrection in a body of flesh” or similar expressions. This is done on purpose. Not to exclude its belief (it is not prohibited), but to encourage the highest degree of scholarly participation on this issue, even from those Historicists who have long held to a fulfilled resurrection of the Patriarchs.
APPLICATION
Here is how it works:
An Olivet Preterist might be someone who says: “I have been raised all my life on dispensational futurism. But I recently came across some studies on the Olivet Discourse. Upon my first hearing, I became mentally dazed because I had no idea there was such a different and persuasive view. But now it is a great comfort to me to know that I can really believe everything that Jesus said. Now I know that something very very important happened both in 30AD and in 70AD. I am persuaded that if we keep the love of God before us we will receive joy and peace as we study these things.”
A Patriarchal Preterist might be someone who says this: “I have been raised all my life on dispensational futurism. But I recently came across some studies on the Olivet Discourse. Upon my first hearing, I became mentally dazed because I had no idea there was such a different and persuasive view. Now it is a great comfort to me to know that I can really believe everything that Jesus said. Now I know that something very very important happened both in 30AD and in 70AD. I also remember Jesus saying that people from all over the world will be coming to sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the Kingdom of God. I do not understand how the Kingdom could begin in full swing unless these Patriarchs were first raised from the dead. So in my heart something tells me that they were indeed raised from the dead. I am a very young Christian right now so I cannot yet fully see the unspeakable glories in the unseen world. However, I am persuaded that if we keep the love of God before us we will receive joy and peace as we study these things.”
Those are just typical examples.
Feel free to share your ideas about this.
-EM
9/15/2006
|
| |
|
|
Average Score: 3
Votes: 1
 |
|
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: A Distinguishing Distinction (Score: 1)
 by Mick on Friday, September 15 @ 12:47:17 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | | I appreciate the hard work and the consideration you have put into this. I fear your categories will serve only to serve and academic interest and create persistent reason for division. In my opinion categories are helpful for research and academic reasons, but not helpful in a community that is striving to understand. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Englishman on Saturday, September 16 @ 00:31:23 PDT
- by Waidmann on Saturday, September 16 @ 06:16:56 PDT
- by Englishman on Saturday, September 16 @ 14:19:39 PDT
Re: A Distinction: The Preterist And The Partially-Pregnant (Score: 1)
 by chrisliv on Friday, September 15 @ 13:24:50 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Well,
In the context of eschatology, a "Preterist" is anyone who, at a minimum, holds that "The Coming of the Son of Man", as espoused by Christ Himself as having a 1st century fulfillment via His Olivet Discourse, has in fact, been fully accomplished with the events that historically occured in and around 70 AD.
Anything less than that, but which has moved significantly away from Dispensational futurism could be fairly characterized as a "partial-Preterist" position.
I mean, it's not possible to be partially-pregnant. And, strictly speaking, you're either a Preterist or you're not. But the process of changing an eschatological viewpoint can be a far slower process than the biological process of fertilizing a human egg cell.
It seems only fair that Preterists encourage those who are still at the partial stage, yet not tolerate hecklers who promote futurism while trying to come in under the radar screen claming to be a "Classic Preterist".
The definition of a "Preterist" is one who holds that the "Coming" or the Apocalypse are "past in fulfillment".
That's the baseline.
Everything else is an accommodation.
Peace to you all,
C. Livingstone |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Waidmann on Saturday, September 16 @ 06:23:05 PDT
- by chrisliv on Saturday, September 16 @ 12:54:24 PDT
Re: A Distinguishing Distinction (Score: 1)
 by paul (freebird@comcast.net) on Saturday, September 16 @ 00:14:06 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | Thanks so much! Well done! I guess, right now, I am simply a person who trusts in Jesus Christ as fully God and fully Man, in accordance with the Apostles' Creed, modifying only "shall come" to "is come" to judge the living and the dead, who is convinced of God's absolute sovereignty in all things, the universality availability in heaven and earth of the Kingdom brought in fullness at Christ's 70 a.d. coming, and who loves all who call on the Lord out of a sincere heart. You have helped enormously with this treatise!
paul richard strange sr. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
| 
|
