So what is The Main Difference Between partial/Hyper preterism?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by JesusFan, Apr 27, 2011.

  1. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    What would be their main disagreement per the scriptures, and are either views considered to be part of "orthodix" Christianity?
     
  2. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Please stop using the word "hyper" to describe full preterism. It isn't nice nor very accurate. :)
     
  3. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    what would be the term? is Full preterism OK?

    And just what are main points of difference between those 2 viewpoints?
     
  4. David Lamb

    David Lamb
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    I fully agree that we should all try not to cause unnecessary offence by the way we word our posts, but sometimes it can be done quite unintentionally. I believe that may be the case here. Indeed, on a preterist website, I found this (my emphasis):
    This view, known as "full preterism" or "hyper-preterism," teaches that ALL prophecy, including the Resurrection (of the just and the unjust), the Second Coming, and the Final Judgment had their fulfillment in the first century surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. This is in contrast to the historic and orthodox preterism of such teachers as R.C. Sproul, Kenneth Gentry, and Gary DeMar who affirm the future bodily return of Christ and the future bodily resurrection.
    So I would just echo JesusFan's question: "Just what are main points of difference between those 2 viewpoints?" (full and hyper preterism).
     
  5. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Namely, that Jesus 2nd coming has already taken place
    Full Prets.. state He has

    And the bodily resurrection of God's people
    Full prets deny this

    These are 2 main points.. I'm sure there are others.
     
  6. David Lamb

    David Lamb
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    But don't hyper-preterists also believe that the Second Coming has already taken place?

    And do not hyper-preterists also deny this?
     
  7. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes.. that is why Full Prets are called Hyper.
    They are one and the same.
     
  8. convicted1

    convicted1
    Expand Collapse
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    9,011
    Likes Received:
    3
    Bro. Allan,

    In these views, what would be the need of us be CHRISTians?? If Jesus has already came again, then there would be no need of us living godly lives. Am I correct in these statements? Please elaborate on the full preterism doctrine, PWEEZEEE???
     
  9. David Lamb

    David Lamb
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    It seems I haven't been clear. (What's new? :laugh: )

    The OP was about the difference between partial preterism and hyperpreterism.

    Preachinjesus replied, objecting to the term "hyper-preterist" for "full preterist".

    My post was an attempt to find out what Preachinjesus thought was the difference between full preterism and hyper-preterism, because to me, it seems they are the same thing, as you say.

    Apologies for the confusion!
     
  10. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    LOL .. no problem.. you do it much less than I do :laugh:

    I would agree that the term hyper is a pejorative used to make the other look bad to others. However the term 'hyper' is and should be used to simply describe the fact that the position one is holding goes beyond the known/understood historical dimensions it is know for.

    Such as Hyper-Calvinist, Arminianism,... ect.. going beyond the historically understood and established position.
     
  11. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0

    just wondering if by believing that Jesus already has come back, and by denying that they will be a future physical resurrection at His return...

    Doesn't that put the teachings of full preterism beyond/outside the "shade of orthodoxy?"
     
  12. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes.. WAY OUTSIDE.
     
  13. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,348
    Likes Received:
    14
    Partial preterism believes the events of AD70 was "a" coming/parousia of Christ but not "the" coming. They would also hold to the traditional view of a future judgment and resurrection.

    Full Preterist would hold that the Scriptures only teach one coming/parousia and that was within the generation of Jesus. Therefore all other events connected with the parousia also occured in that time frame.

    Partial preterist would claim the full preterist go to far and perhaps assume too much, the full preterist would claim the partial preterist is inconsistent by claiming one must adhere to the time statements but then excluding the final parousia, judgment and resurrection from those time statements.

    This is a very brief explanation. Pick up Sprouls "The Last Days According to Jesus" for a more in-depth study.
     

Share This Page

Loading...