Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Grasshopper, Aug 31, 2010.
arguments like this:
An Article Worth Reading
Thanks for posting the link Grasshopper. It was well worth the time to read it. As more and more people get exposed to work like this the undeniable, plain, common sense of preterism will gradually nudge out dispensationalism.
It makes it easy to understand why preterism is enjoying such a strong growth in Christian circles.
For me the conversion to preterism came when I realized the Apostles believed and wrote and taught Christ would return in their life time.
Since I believe the bible in its original manuscripts is inerrant there was no legitimate way to argue with the Apostles. I became a preterist.
You, and that article, make the mistake of assuming that the only two options are dispensationalism or hyper-preterism. I'm neither of those.
Full preterism encompasses multiple damnable heresies. It goes against Holy Scripture and against what the Church has taught throughout history. It is also against the Baptist Faith and Message. Full preterists should be given the opportunity to repent, and if they don't they should be excommunicated out of their churches via church discipline.
I'm going to make strongly worded statements condemning the damnable heresies of full preterism:
1. If any man denies the future, physical Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema.
2. If any man denies the future, physical, bodily resurrection and judgment of all men at the Second Coming, let him be anathema.
3. If any man denies that the Lord Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man, including Jesus having a physical, glorified human body as part of His post-resurrection human nature, let him be anathema.
It is ironic that you have that quote from Wesley in your footer. Wesley validates, in principle, the things you ignorantly anathematize in your #1 and #2.
Excellent article. It hits the nail on the head. This certainly was one of the factors that led me to Preterism.
"But so many of the responses I get are from people who “don’t want to know” or “don’t want to read.” They have settled on a position not because they studied it but because so many other people believe it and teach it that it has to be true."
And then they pound out, Luther-like, their vaguely thought-out anathemas on the red door.
Futurism and preterism are two extreme positions. People that try to avoid the one tend to end up in the other camp. The bible doesn't support either position, instead the bible supports a position that is somewhere in between.
The debate Logos1, is not between preterism and dispensationalism or A-mil vs. dispensationalism. The debate my friend is between covenant vs. dispensational theology.
If the goal of you preterists is to convince dipseys that they are wrong and you are right then you must convince dispies that the Bible teaches a covenant relationship between God and church and that the church is the new owner of the covenants Jehovah cut with Israel.
If, as the early reformers believed, the church is defined as the body of the elect, then in order for you to convince someone like say, me, that covenant theology is correct, you will have to explain where in the Bible the covenants Jehovah cut with Israel promise salvation for eternity to the elect. You will also have to explain why God would change his mind about Israel because of their sin and not change his mind about the church because in my view, the church has as much if not more sin than Israel ever had.
From where I stand at this moment, the main tactic the preterists are using to wage this war with the dipseys is one of a public relations gimmick. It is, as a quick review of the obvious, a tactic to paint dispensationalists as those at the lower end of the thinking class while portraying preterists as the high intellectual achievers. I personally know where I stand in relationship with my fellow believers in the intellectual pecking order and I have nothing to prove to anyone with respect to my mental capabilities. The cut and paste of various Bible verses in these forums, I think is intended to cloud the issue and derail the discussion. I would like to see the train put back on the tracks.
In your educated opinion, is this an effective way to convince fellow believers that you and your theology are correct and they are wrong? What is the effective standard that you use to determine who is ignorant and who is enlightened? Is it possible that there might be someone in your preterest camp with whom you disagree with on some small point of theology that might earn the title of "ignorant" or for the really small infranctions the title "possible ignorant with a note of explanation"? Kindly explain to me how this judgement thing you incorporate works. Would you teach me how to judge the ignorant posts (and posters) from those that are gifted?
Your friend always,
Can't wait to see the look on you preterists' face on the way up!
And the A-Mils on the way back down.
This is not the thread to discuss the difference between the "New Covenant"
as it relates to the Church until Christ comes and to Ephraim/Judah after He
returns with the Elect.
But I find your statement interesting and ask if you might start a thread to
sort out the difference in Israel/Judah's New Covenant as it relates to the soon demise ("about to vanish") of the Old Covenant depicted by Heb.8:13.
And all of our faces when we realize we didn't have every verse absolutely correct.
I read the article and here is my response:
Granted, there are difficulties in every school of eschatological thought, Full Preterism is no exception.
Here are my objections to some of the points in the article.
RE: Appeal to early writings of the church fathers:
The author complains about the objections of modern writers claiming that their preterist indictments would go back in history against Eusebius and “the earliest writings of the church fathers”.
However there is abundant evidence that the early church fathers including students of John the Apostle knew nothing of the Full Preterism,
theory that Titus was the fullfilling of Christ Second Coming in the flesh to judge the nations.
As students of John the Apostle, they cited the Book of revelation and other Scriptures as things which are yet future. These are quotations from students of John and those who were taught by John the Apostle.
Abstracts are from several sites.
A Catholic site with a full set of early church father writings.
Polycarp (AD. 70-156)
Polycarp was a student of John the Apostle
The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians:
"we must all appear at the judgment-seat of Christ, and must every one give an account of himself." Let us then serve Him in fear, and with all reverence, even as He Himself has commanded us and as the apostles who preached the Gospel unto as and the prophets who proclaimed beforehand the coming of the Lord."
Chapter 2 An Exhortation to Virtue
"But He who raised Him up from the dead will raise up us also"
PAPIAS (AD. 70-155)
Another student of John the Apostle
Abstracts from the Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord
"those who are deemed worthy of an abode in heaven shall go there, others shall enjoy the delights of Paradise, and others shall possess the splendor of the city; for everywhere the Saviour will be seen, according as they shall be worthy who see Him."
"there will be a millennium after the resurrection from the dead, when the personal reign of Christ will be established on this earth"
Ignatius. AD67-110. Another pupil of John the Apostle
From The Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians, Chapter 9.
"He was also truly raised from the dead, His Father quickening Him, even as after the same manner His Father will so raise up us who believe in Him by Christ Jesus"
Irenaeus. AD120-202. a student of John the Apostles’ pupil Polycarp
Against Heresies, Book 5:30.
"But he indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is: But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing in for the righteous the times of the kingdom"
"In a still clearer light has John, in the Apocalypse, indicated to the Lord's disciples what shall happen in the last times, and concerning the ten kings who shall then arise, ... These have one mind, and give their strength and power to the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, because He is the Lord of lords, and King of kings. ... And they shall lay Babylon waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the beast, and put the church to flight. After that they shall be destroyed by the coming of our Lord."
"For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just which takes place after the coming of the antichrist and the destruction of the nations under His rule; in the times which resurrection the righteous shall reign on the earth, … and those whom the Lord shall find in the flesh awaiting Him from heaven, and who have suffered tribulation, as well as escaped the hands of the wicked one."
A Student of Iranaeus. Treatise on Christ and Antichrist Book 5.
"It is proper that we take the Holy Scriptures themselves in hand, and find out from them what, and of what manner, the coming of Antichrist is; on what occasion and what time that impious one shall be revealed; and whence and from what tribe (he shall come); and what his name is, which is indicated by the number in Scripture; and how he shall work error among the people, gathering them from the ends of the earth; and (how) he shall stir up tribulation and persecution against the saints; and how he shall glorify himself as God; and what his end shall be; and how the sudden appearing of the Lord shall be revealed from heaven; and what the conflagration of the whole world shall be; and what the glorious and heavenly kingdom of the saints is to be, when they reign together with Christ; and what the punishment of the wicked by fire."
"As these things, then, are in the future, and as the ten toes of the image are equivalent to (so many) democracies, and the ten horns of the fourth beast are distributed over ten kingdoms, let us look at the subject a little more closely, and consider these matters as in the clear light of a personal survey. The golden head of the image and the lioness denoted the Babylonians; the shoulders and arms of silver, and the bear, represented the Persians and Medes; the belly and thighs of brass, and the leopard, meant the Greeks, who held the sovereignty from Alexander's time; the legs of iron, and the beast dreadful and terrible, expressed the Romans, who hold the sovereignty at present; the toes of the feet which were part clay and part iron, and the ten horns, were emblems of the kingdoms that are yet to rise; the other little horn that grows up among them meant the Antichrist in their midst"
"Now concerning the tribulation of the persecution which is to fall upon the Church from the adversary, John also speaks thus, "And I saw a great and wondrous sign in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, ... And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent." That refers to the one thousand two hundred and threescore days (the half of the week) during which the tyrant is to reign and persecute the Church.... These things then, being come to pass, beloved, and the one week being divided into two parts, and the abomination of desolation being manifested then, and the two prophets and forerunners of the Lord having finished their course, and the whole world finally approaching the consummation, what remains but the coming of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ from heaven, for whom we have looked in hope."
FROM Commentaries Book 2.
"When the times are fulfilled, and the ten horns spring from the beast in the last (times), then Antichrist will appear among them. When he makes war against the saints, and persecutes them, then may we expect the manifestation of the Lord from heaven."
Others who taught the Second Coming as Future:
Justin Martyr AD100-165
Tertullian 2nd-3rd century
Cyprian 3rd century
Cyril 4th century
Chrysostom 4th century
And many many others.
To be continued...
I was responding to another posters comments. If I have broken forum rules that require that we stay on topic I appologize however I don't think I have. I do appreciate your civility however, as I mentioned, to preach preterism in an environment that allows for dispensational thought requires this discussion. I am on the verge of becoming offended by nice people who trash other nice people simply because they insist on a consistant literal reading of the Bible.
It is impossible for anyone to be a preterist without jumping on the covenent bandwagon first. So unless you want to shutdown any real debate in opposition to preterism, you are going to have to put up with the likes of little old me. In my opinion, some of the preterist on this board are beginning to push to the outter limits of christian behavior. If my views or my behavior become distasteful so as to cause the mods to remove me from this group then I take my leave without fight. Let me remind you that there are many Baptist who are dispensational.
There is a popular puritan site that many here belong to that has no (zero) tolerance for dispensationalim or pre-mil-ism. This is the only place that I know of where I can debate those people or even ask them questions.
PS on edit: I'm not sure the "New Covenant" that Jeremiah speaks of and the New Covenant Jesus spoke about are the same covenant. Both are called new, that is true and I'm sure the Apostles might have said in the upper room something like "ok, the new covenant spoken of by the prophet Jeremiah". But I don't know right at this point how to make it one in the same covenant or a fufilment of same. Oh, and just for the record, when my desire to settle this question becomes unbearable, I will search for the answer myself, not take anyone on the internets word for it, nice person that they may be.
For ease of discussion, allow me to isolate the ANFs from the whole of the ECFs. For every doctrine that you can find support for in the ANFs, there are other places in the writings of the ANFs that would oppose you. The ANFs are interesting and yes I read them but the writers were not inspired and some of them we might not consider christian today. None of them traveled with Jesus during his ministry and probably none of them were Jewish converts to Christ.
I agree with you that preterism is not found in the ANFs but I think this is a weak arguement against preterism. All we have to do is look at the Bible which describes the second coming as an event that will be seen by all peoples of the earth when it happens and since history doesn't record this event, it hasn't happened yet, the second coming must be yet future. It really doesn't get any simpler than that.
I was responding to the author.
He brought up the issue of the Early Church Fathers. I simply responded in like kind.
OK, got it.
Read Hebrews 8-10.
Read Jeremiah 31:31