Partial Preterist?

[Abiding Now]

I'm see the words used so could someone give me the short version of what a partial preterist believes.
Thanks.

[mfblume]

Kingdom Eschatology is what I call it and is the view that almost all Biblical prophecy is past (excluding the The Second Coming, The Resurrection and The Judgment).

Kingdom Eschatology refers to that wide spectrum of thought which is not fully Futurist, but which incorporates some portion of what the Futurist view has to offer. Some, but not all, prophecies were fulfilled in the destruction of the Jewish nation in A.D. 70. The "big three" prophecies are yet future - the Great Judgment, Resurrection and Second Coming of Christ.

These events are yet future:

The coming (parousia) of Christ
The resurrection of the dead
The resurrection of the living
The (final) judgment
The end of history

The scriptures in Matthew 24 that have been taken to speak about the rapture are misapplied references to the rapture. The true rapture references are in 1 Corinthians 15, and other places.

some of the references to the coming of the Son of Man do not refer to the rapture, but rather to a judgment that occurred in 70 AD.

Kingdom Eschatologists believe the following verses literally:

Matthew 16:27-28 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Jesus' wrath came in their day, their generation. It was a monumental event for the City of Jerusalem to be destroyed, as you read in the latter part of Matthew 23, for they crucified Him in ultimate unbelief. As the cross is central to the entire Bible, the Jerusalem rejection of Christ through crucifying Him, was the greatest evil accomplished, thus giving credence to the view that the great amount of prophetic scriptures deal with the destruction of Jerusalem yet to come in 70 AD.

As opposed to a visible temple and physical Kingdom, His Kingdom is invisible and is in you. And it came at Pentecost, but was confirmed as God's only concern in 70 AD.

Luke 17:20-21 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

It will be made manifest to all the souls of humanity after He returns.

Generally speaking, Kingdom Eschatology denies dispensationalism. It teaches that there are only two covenants of God's concern. Old Testament and New Testament. Kingdom Eschatologists note that the New Testament refers to no other divisions besides Old Testament and New Testament.

We propose that the entire 70 weeks of Daniel, as per Daniel 9:24-27, have been totally fulfilled in uninterrupted sequence. There is no gap between the 69th and 70th weeks.

(That means that there is no future tribulation period of seven years or 3.5 years.)

[Abiding Now]

Kingdom Eschatology is what I call it and is the view that almost all Biblical prophecy is past (excluding the The Second Coming, The Resurrection and The Judgment).

Kingdom Eschatology refers to that wide spectrum of thought which is not fully Futurist, but which incorporates some portion of what the Futurist view has to offer. Some, but not all, prophecies were fulfilled in the destruction of the Jewish nation in A.D. 70. The "big three" prophecies are yet future - the Great Judgment, Resurrection and Second Coming of Christ.

These events are yet future:

The coming (parousia) of Christ
The resurrection of the dead
The resurrection of the living
The (final) judgment
The end of history

The scriptures in Matthew 24 that have been taken to speak about the rapture are misapplied references to the rapture. The true rapture references are in 1 Corinthians 15, and other places.

some of the references to the coming of the Son of Man do not refer to the rapture, but rather to a judgment that occurred in 70 AD.

Kingdom Eschatologists believe the following verses literally:

Matthew 16:27-28 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Jesus' wrath came in their day, their generation. It was a monumental event for the City of Jerusalem to be destroyed, as you read in the latter part of Matthew 23, for they crucified Him in ultimate unbelief. As the cross is central to the entire Bible, the Jerusalem rejection of Christ through crucifying Him, was the greatest evil accomplished, thus giving credence to the view that the great amount of prophetic scriptures deal with the destruction of Jerusalem yet to come in 70 AD.

As opposed to a visible temple and physical Kingdom, His Kingdom is invisible and is in you. And it came at Pentecost, but was confirmed as God's only concern in 70 AD.

Luke 17:20-21 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

It will be made manifest to all the souls of humanity after He returns.

Generally speaking, Kingdom Eschatology denies dispensationalism. It teaches that there are only two covenants of God's concern. Old Testament and New Testament. Kingdom Eschatologists note that the New Testament refers to no other divisions besides Old Testament and New Testament.

We propose that the entire 70 weeks of Daniel, as per Daniel 9:24-27, have been totally fulfilled in uninterrupted sequence. There is no gap between the 69th and 70th weeks.

(That means that there is no future tribulation period of seven years or 3.5 years.)

OK Thanks. Could you expound on the bolded? Are they speaking of an actual "coming" of Jesus?

[mfblume]

OK Thanks. Could you expound on the bolded? Are they speaking of an actual "coming" of Jesus?
The coming is Greek is actually presence, and is by no means physical. Isaiah 10 says God used heathen armies to afflict jerusalem. its that idea. His physical coming is yet to come and takes us to the white throne.

It's the coming in matthew 21:40 that is in 24.

[FlamingZword]

I was just about to answer with all the same exact words that Mike used, but he beat me to it. :D

[Michael The Disciple]

So when its all said and done no difference between partial pret and pre trib. No future trib to face and Jesus can come any minute. Amen?

[KeptByTheWord]

Bro. Blume... do you see anything in scripture that gives any indication as to when the Lord will be finished with the earth as it has been for the last 6000 years or so, and when it will be all wrapped up with the White Throne Judgment? Not asking you to step out on a limb, and give a date or time, (lol) but... are there any specific events that need to take place before we face the WTJ?

[KeptByTheWord]

So when its all said and done no difference between partial pret and pre trib. No future trib to face and Jesus can come any minute. Amen?

I just can't get away from the fact that the DAY OF THE LORD that is spoken about through both the OT and NT has still yet to come... and that day is always spoken of taking place with great wrath and suffering.

[Originalist]

Let's lighten these eschatology debates up a bit!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr6eYewvN74

[mfblume]

Bro. Blume... do you see anything in scripture that gives any indication as to when the Lord will be finished with the earth as it has been for the last 6000 years or so, and when it will be all wrapped up with the White Throne Judgment? Not asking you to step out on a limb, and give a date or time, (lol) but... are there any specific events that need to take place before we face the WTJ?

I believe there will be a time of trouble when the devil is loosed for a season and wreak havoc against the church, which posttribbers will mistaken for the great trib of Matthew 24, and that will occur just before the resurrection.

(And I told this to Michael before but he forgot)

Rev 20:7-9 KJV And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, (8) And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. (9) And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

So, no Michael, it is not lilke pretrib.

And KeptByTheWord, this is the only indication I see of the resurrection to come. We're in the thousand years. That means at the end of that figurative LOOONG time period the devil will be loosed. That is trouble.

[mfblume]

So when its all said and done no difference between partial pret and pre trib. No future trib to face and Jesus can come any minute. Amen?

Nope. Read my previous verse. I told you this long ago actually.

[mfblume]

bump

[Esaias]

bump

...iddy bump!

[KeptByTheWord]

This has been a bumpy thread... lol

[Evang.Benincasa]

http://www.gifbin.com/bin/032012/1332783653_bumpy_street.gif

[TJJJ]

And a bump bump here and a bump bump there, here a bump, there a bump, everywhere a bump bump.....

[Lafon]

Just wondering aloud here, but is a "partial" preterist also "partially" saved? rofl

[shag]

And a bump bump here and a bump bump there, here a bump, there a bump, everywhere a bump bump.....


Bumpedy thump thump

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uzhkUmKpahI

[Abiding Now]

I believe there will be a time of trouble when the devil is loosed for a season and wreak havoc against the church, which posttribbers will mistaken for the great trib of Matthew 24, and that will occur just before the resurrection.

(And I told this to Michael before but he forgot)

Rev 20:7-9 KJV And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, (8) And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. (9) And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

So, no Michael, it is not lilke pretrib.

And KeptByTheWord, this is the only indication I see of the resurrection to come. We're in the thousand years. That means at the end of that figurative LOOONG time period the devil will be loosed. That is trouble.

At what point in the past did the 1,000 years begin and does that mean that the devil is actually "bound" now?

[shazeep]

ok, that's pretty easy to refute, i think?
Let's lighten these eschatology debates up a bit!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr6eYewvN74:lol better than making naive guesses about tomorrow, imo

[mfblume]

At what point in the past did the 1,000 years begin and does that mean that the devil is actually "bound" now?

Thousand is a Hebraism for a huge number.

Cattle on a thousand years. It covers most all the church age.

[Esaias]

What is meant by "the church age" considering our common view of what constitutes the "church"?

[mfblume]

What is meant by "the church age" considering our common view of what constitutes the "church"?

New Testament era... last of all eras, I believe.

[Lafon]

What is meant by "the church age" considering our common view of what constitutes the "church"?


While the phrase "the church age" is not found in the language of the Bible, nevertheless when Stephen was brought before the council and it was demanded of him to justify his words that were alleged to have been blasphemous against Moses and against God, he spoke of God being present in "the church in the wilderness with the angel which spoke" to Moses in mount Sinai, is, to me at least, a scriptural-based indication for believing that the so-called "church age" is NOT restricted to a particular period of time (see Acts 7:38).

This I've concluded as being an era when God dealt with His church through the theopathy (a visible manifestation) of an angel (a spirit being), whereas in His church as it presently exists with the Son of man, Christ Jesus our Lord and Savior, as its Head, every member has been granted the privilege of a one-on-one personal relationship with the Spirit, thus the saying that Christ Jesus is the "mediator" between God (Spirit) and man (see I Timothy 2:5), and the church, as we know it today, is that church which our Lord referred to in His conversation with Peter (see Matthew 16:18).

In summation, I do not believe it appropriate or proper to restrict the presence of God's church to a particular time-frame, but that it has been present in the earth about 4,000 years, thus making this period of time the "church age," that is, if one desires to refer to it as such.

I'm not stating this as an indisputable fact, but simply my opinion tendered for consideration of its merits.

[Esaias]

New Testament era... last of all eras, I believe.

What I'm asking about is if the Millennium is "the church age", then does that line up with the actual history of the church? Considering we do not accept the visible majority representation of christianity throughout most of history as the actual church, how then do you understand the Millennium to be demonstrated throughout history?

[mfblume]

What I'm asking about is if the Millennium is "the church age", then does that line up with the actual history of the church? Considering we do not accept the visible majority representation of christianity throughout most of history as the actual church, how then do you understand the Millennium to be demonstrated throughout history?

I understand the millennium to be portrayed in the way the bible speaks of the kingdom. Jesus is on every throne now that He is ever going to sit upon. And we are seated with Him. Rev 20 says people sat on thrones.

Jesus said you can't spoil the strong man til you first bind him. And if Col 2 says the devil's been spoiled by the work of the cross, then he must have been bound first.

Daniel said the stone that hit the image of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 2 became a mountain and filled the earth. That's the kingdom of God. It's spreading throughout history.

[Esaias]

I understand the millennium to be portrayed in the way the bible speaks of the kingdom. Jesus is on every throne now that He is ever going to sit upon. And we are seated with Him. Rev 20 says people sat on thrones.

Jesus said you can't spoil the strong man til you first bind him. And if Col 2 says the devil's been spoiled by the work of the cross, then he must have been bound first.

Daniel said the stone that hit the image of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 2 became a mountain and filled the earth. That's the kingdom of God. It's spreading throughout history.

Yes but has that been demonstrated historically? From the 2nd century to the 1600s or so there was apostasy and an overflowing abundance of superstition being passed off as christianity. Reformation brought some relief from catholic domination but opened the floodgates of schism and every conceivable heresy, including the worst heresy of all: humanism (via the "Renaissance" and so-called Enlightenment).

Looking across history it just doesn't seem to match the idea of the pure gospel being victorious and spreading. It doesn't seem to match the idea of satan being bound so as not to deceive the gentiles anymore. Seems like deception has been the predominant theme of post apostolic religious history.

[mfblume]

Yes but has that been demonstrated historically? From the 2nd century to the 1600s or so there was apostasy and an overflowing abundance of superstition being passed off as christianity. Reformation brought some relief from catholic domination but opened the floodgates of schism and every conceivable heresy, including the worst heresy of all: humanism (via the "Renaissance" and so-called Enlightenment).

Looking across history it just doesn't seem to match the idea of the pure gospel being victorious and spreading. It doesn't seem to match the idea of satan being bound so as not to deceive the gentiles anymore. Seems like deception has been the predominant theme of post apostolic religious history.

Like I said, I am talking this from what the word itself says. We know Christ is on the throne since He ascended and we're seated with him. That's enough for me. The detail most everyone misses in the deception issue in Rev 20 is that satan is bound from deceiving for a very specific deception... gathering nations against the church. That has never happened in a wholesale manner before, but it will.

[Esaias]

Like I said, I am talking this from what the word itself says. We know Christ is on the throne since He ascended and we're seated with him. That's enough for me. The detail most everyone misses in the deception issue in Rev 20 is that satan is bound from deceiving for a very specific deception... gathering nations against the church. That has never happened in a wholesale manner before, but it will.

How are ypu defining "church"? During the dark ages, for example, were apostolic believers present and persecuted by the nations under the control of the Vatican? What about Communist nations persecuting Christians as a matter of government policy?

[Michael The Disciple]

yes but has that been demonstrated historically? From the 2nd century to the 1600s or so there was apostasy and an overflowing abundance of superstition being passed off as christianity. Reformation brought some relief from catholic domination but opened the floodgates of schism and every conceivable heresy, including the worst heresy of all: Humanism (via the "renaissance" and so-called enlightenment).

Looking across history it just doesn't seem to match the idea of the pure gospel being victorious and spreading. It doesn't seem to match the idea of satan being bound so as not to deceive the gentiles anymore. Seems like deception has been the predominant theme of post apostolic religious history.

yes exactly!

[mfblume]

How are ypu defining "church"? During the dark ages, for example, were apostolic believers present and persecuted by the nations under the control of the Vatican? What about Communist nations persecuting Christians as a matter of government policy?

What about them? Not getting your point.

[mfblume]

The kingdom of God has been spreading. There's more christianity now than ever and it has been increasing since the first century every century. Christ's kingdom is more influential every century.

[FlamingZword]

How are ypu defining "church"? During the dark ages, for example, were apostolic believers present and persecuted by the nations under the control of the Vatican? What about Communist nations persecuting Christians as a matter of government policy?

Yes there was the dark ages, but even during the dark ages, there were plenty of "heretics" faithful to the Lord.
Most of the communist nations have disappeared and in those lands Christianity has resurged from the ashes.

Christianity just keeps on growing in numbers and in power.

Only in America and Europe is there a retreat from Christian values, but eventually we will see a stronger resurgence in Europe.

[Esaias]

The fact the true church was essentially obscured throughout most of history, classified as heretics, doesn't fit a millenial reign of saints with satan being bound so the nations would not be deceived. If the binding is so that the nations would not be led into waging war against the church, then it certainly doesn't fit history. The persecutions against believers was conducted by national governments.

Pointing to the fall of communism doesn't fit unless you want to say the millennium began in 1989.

While it is true the basic facts about Jesus being the Christ have spread "every century", that necessarily brings us back to my question - who or what is the church? Does the millennium describe the advance of trinitarian Christianity, evangelical Protestantism, catholicism?

Amillennialism only works if those described as ruling and reigning are composed primarily of those we generally consider to be unsaved.

On the other hand, revelation describes the church as being hidden for a time in a wilderness, as the "earth" drinks up the satanic flood spewed from the dragon's mouth sent to carry it away, and the dragon making war against the saints who have the faith of Jesus and who keep the commandments of God.

[mfblume]

The fact the true church was essentially obscured throughout most of history, classified as heretics, doesn't fit a millenial reign of saints with satan being bound so the nations would not be deceived. If the binding is so that the nations would not be led into waging war against the church, then it certainly doesn't fit history. The persecutions against believers was conducted by national governments.


The point is all the nations were gathered in Rev 20. not some. That has never happened yet.

[mfblume]

Yes there was the dark ages, but even during the dark ages, there were plenty of "heretics" faithful to the Lord.
Most of the communist nations have disappeared and in those lands Christianity has resurged from the ashes.

Christianity just keeps on growing in numbers and in power.

Only in America and Europe is there a retreat from Christian values, but eventually we will see a stronger resurgence in Europe.

Amen.