No person can come to Christ by their own freewill !
- Thread starter brightfame52
- Start date
Looked it up
Is partial preterism biblical? What do partial preterists believe? | GotQuestions.org
Is partial preterism biblical? What do partial preterists believe? Have most of the events described in Revelation already occurred?
www.gotquestions.org
civic
Active Member
Just a thought here maybe say its unbiblical, unorthodox, heterodox, etc......
civic
Active Member
the last paragraphLooked it up
Is partial preterism biblical? What do partial preterists believe? | GotQuestions.org
Is partial preterism biblical? What do partial preterists believe? Have most of the events described in Revelation already occurred?www.gotquestions.org
The partial preterist viewpoint leads to a belief in amillenialism (or post-millenialism) and is associated with covenant theology. Of course, it rejects dispensationalism. But its main problem is its inconsistent hermeneutic and its allegorizing of many biblical prophecies that are better understood literally. While partial preterism is within the scope of orthodoxy, it is not the majority view among Christians today.
and this
The interpretive problem this poses is one of positing a position that presupposes two returns of Christ (one local and one universal). The scriptures nowhere teach a local/universal two time return of Christ—only one return (cf. Acts 1:10-11; Heb. 9:27-28). The preterist position (full or partial) is an untenable position to forward, at least in its relationship to the clearer teaching of scripture (analogia fidei).
As you can see at the end, I critique partial preterism as well, and I did so from my Dispy Premillennial perspective. I am willing to concede that there are some partial preterist elements going on especially as noted in the Olivet Discourse (cf. Mt. 24), and aspects of the book of Revelation (but I’d rather label what I hold as historist in a denotative way, and not in the connotative way that developed among the Calvinian Reformed and Lutherans who saw Roman Catholicism and the papacy as fulfilling the role of the Beast and the anti-Christ; I see the Roman Empire, in the context and historical situation of the book and theology of Revelation, as typifying the ‘kind’ of Beastly power that is characteristic of ages and peoples who are opposed to the purposes of God … I think even literarily this correlates well with a motif and theology of Babylon throughout scripture’s usage).
As far as Full Preterism, as I said, quite strongly, I see it as a full orbed heresy; why? Because it, by definition denies the bodily resurrection of all believers from all ages. According to scripture this transformation (Phil. 3.20-21) will happen when the last trumpet sounds, the dead in Christ will rise first, prior to those living at the time of Christ’s second coming (I Thess. 4 etc.); all of which will happen in a twinkling of an eye (I Cor. 15.) It contradicts the clear teaching of scripture and the angelical declaration that Christ will return in like manner; in like manner to his ascension, which was bodily. Acts 1.9-11 says,
9 After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. 10 They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. 11 “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”
This requires no argument, it is straightforward; Jesus will return just as he left, bodily, and visibly; not secretly or platonically spiritually. There are theological points associated with this, especially by the book of Revelation; but those points aren’t necessary to undercut the aberrant teaching that Jesus will not return bodily (of course how ‘bodily’ is understood for some varies; some hold to the ubiquity of Christ’s body, for example, but even this view must account for the particularity of Christ’s body as understood in context found in Acts 1) and a second time (as the epistle to the Hebrews also refers to more than once)https://growrag.wordpress.com/2023/...al-preterism-gary-demar-and-various-heresies/
hope this helps !!!
Last edited:
brightfame52
Active Member
You entitled to your opinion I gave my scriptural basis for what I believe
brightfame52
Active Member
Yes, but as vessels of mercy. Isn't sinful people a candidate for mercy?
Hebrews 8:12
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
brightfame52
Active Member
I don't understand you
civic
Active Member
AI has been on point lately- partial preterism
Arguments against partial preterism claim it has an inconsistent interpretation of scripture, often allegorizing prophecies that should be read literally, and it denies a future, final judgment by placing all major end-time events in the past. Critics also point to the view's inconsistent application to other biblical prophecies and historical texts, arguing it was not held by the early church fathers, and that it ignores the global and cataclysmic nature of some described prophecies.
Scriptural and hermeneutical issues
Arguments against partial preterism claim it has an inconsistent interpretation of scripture, often allegorizing prophecies that should be read literally, and it denies a future, final judgment by placing all major end-time events in the past. Critics also point to the view's inconsistent application to other biblical prophecies and historical texts, arguing it was not held by the early church fathers, and that it ignores the global and cataclysmic nature of some described prophecies.
Scriptural and hermeneutical issues
- Inconsistent interpretation:
Some critics argue that partial preterism requires an inconsistent application of scriptural interpretation, applying a literal view to some prophecies while allegorizing others, which they say makes the hermeneutic subjective.
- Allegorizing scripture:
This inconsistent approach leads to an allegorical interpretation of many prophecies that might otherwise be understood more literally.
- Discrepancy with biblical texts:
Critics believe that partial preterism is not consistent with the Bible itself, pointing to texts like 2 Thessalonians 2:1 which describes the "day of Christ" as a future event.
- Allegorizing scripture:
- Rejection of a future judgment:
One of the main criticisms is that partial preterism denies a future, universal, public judgment of all people. Instead, it associates the great judgment with the destruction of Jerusalem or an ongoing spiritual reality.
- Denial of future resurrection:
For some critics, the logical extension of full preterism (which asserts all prophecies were fulfilled in the first century) is that the future resurrection of the dead has already occurred, which is widely considered heretical.
- Rejection of a future judgment:
- Rejection by early church fathers:
Many argue that none of the early church fathers (first three centuries A.D.) viewed the Second Coming as a past event. In contrast, they believed it was a future event, and this view was passed down to their disciples.
- Dating of the Book of Revelation:
Some scholars argue that the Book of Revelation was written around A.D. 95, after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, which would make the prophecies it contains not fully fulfilled in the first century.
- Inappropriateness of A.D. 70 for global events:
Critics contend that the tribulation events described in the Book of Revelation are too global and cataclysmic to be solely attributed to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
- Rejection by early church fathers:
- Softening biblical effect:
Some worry that shifting from a historical-literal approach to a more allegorical interpretation softens the effect of Scripture on believers.
- Relationship to replacement theology:
Partial preterism can lead to an extreme form of replacement theology, suggesting that the church has completely replaced Israel in God's plan.
- Reinterpretation of other doctrines:
Critics argue that if prophecies are fulfilled in the past, it can lead to reinterpreting or dismissing other doctrines, such as a literal interpretation of Genesis or a global flood, and in some cases even the existence of a personal Devil.
- Softening biblical effect:
brightfame52
Active Member
Do you want to do a thread on justification?
brightfame52
Active Member
Romans chapter 9 talks about a people God made as vessels of wrath and fits them for destruction.The only other possible beings other than anthropos are aliens. Tell us more about your Aliens Beliefs. This will be entertaining.
I'll start a thread
unless you have a year supply of popcorn
Please don't stir the potThe only other possible beings other than anthropos are aliens. Tell us more about your Aliens Beliefs. This will be entertaining.
unless you have a year supply of popcorn
Go for it.
I want you to justify your claim.
Ephesians 2:12 (NASB 95) — 12 remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
Your claim they were justified from birth is erroneous.
brightfame52
Active Member
A complete assumption proclaimed without a shred of proof
