Full Preterism

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Godrulesmyworld, Jun 23, 2006.

  1. Godrulesmyworld

    Godrulesmyworld
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not clear on something here... but first, what's the view of Baptists about Full (not partial) Preterism?

    Married Mark
     
  2. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know about the baptist veiw, since there appear to be preterists wearing baptist uniforms. But Preterism is not sound doctrine. It is just yet another deception employed to keep lukewarm Christians from being effective ministers of the Gospel in the last days. No one needs to worry about their Lord delaying His coming, if He already came.
     
  3. Godrulesmyworld

    Godrulesmyworld
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    I personally agree. But here's my question. I know a Preterist. Just one. And when I first had heard of it by that one person, I was open to hearing more. There's a kajillion different eschatological views, why not consider what the man had to say... right? As I was studying, I found that I completely disagreed with that view's demand that their interpretation of the timestamps was the only valid one and still found their doctine to be completely lacking in other areas. So I find that it is not true. After having determined that, I thought something along the lines of "No big deal, we just disagree like a million other people about eschatology. However, in continuing to read the scriptures, I ran across Paul's teachings in 2Timothy 2:16-18. Full Preterism claims that all has been fulfilled in 70 A.D., right? And if I believe they are wrong, does not this passage still apply? Paul says that teaching such is a cancer to the body and will lead some away from the faith? Does that not make this a damnable heresy? I'll ask more after replies on this much.

    Married Mark
     
  4. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,348
    Likes Received:
    14


    And of course us heretics understand the “last days” were in the 1st century:

    Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
    Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;



    Heresy 101 says:

    Heb 10:37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.

    Ever hear a preacher say,”see you next week if the Lord tarries”?


    2Ti 2:16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
    2Ti 2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
    2Ti 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

    Help me out, when was 2 Tim. written?

    Why would anyone believe a resurrection had come if it meant dead bodies coming out of the grave? Would that not be quite obvious? Paul should have said, “o foolish ones, go look into thou graves” and been done with it.

    Doesn’t the resurrection occur, according to non-heretics, at the second coming? Doesn’t the resurrection happen after the rapture? Why would they think the resurrection was past, they were still there. Didn’t they believe in a rapture? Didn’t they know the “elements melt with fervent heat” at His coming?

     
  5. Godrulesmyworld

    Godrulesmyworld
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm sorry Grasshopper. This is really not a question of the validity of the claims by Full Preterists. I do not believe it. This is a question for futurists and how they, in denying the validity of the Preterist claim, should handle such things.

    Married Mark
     
  6. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well obviously they were told that it was spiritual and checking the graves wouldn't do any good. A better question would be why do you think the resurrection is past when you are still here. Are you arguing that because they fell for the same lie, it must be true?
     
  7. Godrulesmyworld

    Godrulesmyworld
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    That certainly would be a better question in a discussion on the validity of Full Preterism. That's not this discussion though. I'm trying to find out if I'm understanding things correctly from a futurist position. As a futurist, is it correct to assume Paul's words still apply and that they mean that FP is a damnable heresy?

    Married Mark
     
  8. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would agree, untill we get another set of scriptures informing us that there was an invisible resurrection two thousand years ago, Pauls words still stand.
     
  9. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    And as Paul warns, these vain and profane babblings will increase unto more ungodliness. Christians who believe that these doctrines are not important or do not affect ones walk are mistaken.
     
  10. Godrulesmyworld

    Godrulesmyworld
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, then here's my next question. While I understand there may be exceptions... for instance, a new believer has just accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior, but then gets caught up with a Preterist circle and has not yet studied it for himself... but in general, is one who is a Full Preterist and adamently teaches it properly classified as a false teacher as described in 2Peter 2? I understand that a false teacher is not just someone who is wrong about a doctrine, but one who teaches a damnable heresy. Would that be the general case for adament Full Preterists? If not, could you explain why you don't think it is the case?

    Married Mark
     
  11. Godrulesmyworld

    Godrulesmyworld
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good point which I see evidenced in the one person I know that adheres to this doctrine.

    Married Mark
     
  12. Godrulesmyworld

    Godrulesmyworld
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Does anyone else have any thoughts or input about my questions?

    Married Mark
     
  13. PrimePower7

    PrimePower7
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    277
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, Mark

    Without question, there were people, Gnostics by name, who not only denied the bodily resurrection of the Lord, but also the bodily resurrection of us who will be "fashioned like unto His glorious body" Hmmm. Good point, Mark
     
  14. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've been gone for a few days, and I'm a little surprised that this topic hasn't generated any discussion. Preterism is creeping into churches and I guess the watchmen are sleeping.
     
  15. PrimePower7

    PrimePower7
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    277
    Likes Received:
    0
    James

    What do you want out of the "watchmen"?
     
  16. Godrulesmyworld

    Godrulesmyworld
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good afternoon to you all. Here's my thing. I personally want the clarification from other Christians (and I chose the Baptist board because Baptist's, overall, have always seemed fairly sound in their theology) to verify my belief that a person who so dogmatically teaches such heresy as Preterism is truly going to hell in their present state. I want this confirmation because I've told that guy that I think it's damnable and if he sticks on his present path and theology he'll find himself not in heaven, but in hell. I've tried to reason with him but he won't hear anything but what he has already decided to believe. Other Christians I know acknowledge that the doctrine is incredibly wrong and wicked, but they're all mad at me for saying that, in his present state, he's going to hell. Several will have nothing to do with me now until I apologize to him and tell him I don't think that's so. Am I wrong in believing and stating this? That "watchman" idea is exactly why I feel I should be saying something. As it says in Ezekiel 3, if I say nothing, he'll still go to hell, but his blood will also be on my hands. Thanks for any other input anyone cares to share.

    Married Mark
     
  17. PrimePower7

    PrimePower7
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    277
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whoa, wait a minute, Mark

    A person doesn't go to Hell for teaching a 1st Century Resurrection! A person goes to Hell because he "believeth not on the Son" John 3:18. Let's remember what gets a person to Heaven. "believing on the Son".

    Staying right on eschatology does not deem one worthy of Heaven
     
  18. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, assuming for the time being that the eternal security of a believer is not dependant on their eschatological views, and I would agree with that, what is the danger in a doctrine that the bible calls a 'damnable heresy'?
     
  19. Godrulesmyworld

    Godrulesmyworld
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    But what son is he believing on if he's not returning? The Bible clearly teaches that wrongly teaching the resurrection is past is wrongly teaching a damnable heresy. If one is teaching a damnable heresy, does that not make him a false teacher which is equivalent to a false prophet which is equivalent to going to hell?

    Married Mark

    PS: As far as eschatology, I agree, our differences are merely differences... except for Preterism, as it is specifically counted as a damnable heresy.
     
  20. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'll tell you what I believe, Mark. I believe that as a believer, I will appear before the judgment seat of Christ at His second coming, to receive for the things done in the flesh. The preterist veiw totally eliminates the fear of judgment for the believer because the judgment happened in AD 70. As those in the 'free grace' camp have recoiled from the accountability teaching that warnings in the bible are directed at believers, they are starting to embrace this damnable heresy as the alternative.
     

Share This Page

Loading...