Donations for the month of December


We have received a total of "$0" in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Forum Search
Member Spotlight
Posts: 3,245
Joined: September 2003
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics7,674
Posts54,383
Members973
Most Online523
Jan 14th, 2020
Top Posters
Pilgrim 14,320
Tom 4,350
chestnutmare 3,245
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,852
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 44
Pilgrim 23
jta 3
Recent Posts
Mask Situation
by Tom - Thu Dec 08, 2022 3:13 PM
Exclusive Source
by NetChaplain - Thu Dec 08, 2022 10:11 AM
Shutting Down a Vaccine Debate
by Pilgrim - Thu Dec 08, 2022 6:22 AM
Trump's Recent Controversial Statements
by Pilgrim - Tue Dec 06, 2022 6:55 AM
Trudeau on Unvaccinated Canadians
by Tom - Sat Dec 03, 2022 1:28 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
#57971 Thu Aug 25, 2022 9:25 AM
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,852
John_C Offline OP
Permanent Resident
OP Offline
Permanent Resident
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,852
How do you exactly describe a partial preterist? Here is what I think I know but I am probably wrong. My pastor started a Sunday School class on Revelation, and he used the Hendricksen’s book ‘More than Conquerors’ for describing the 4 ways of interpreting Revelation. They are Preterist, Historicists, Futurists, and Idealists. The Preterist is considered heretical in its interpretation method of saying all prophecy was fulfilled by the time of the Fall of Jerusalem around 70 AD. I guess they deny the 2nd Coming. The Historicists were popular with the early Reformers, The Futurists interpretation is the most popular today with its pre-mil view. The Idealist is the interpretation that more of the a-mil Reformers today take. (Which include me (I think)). My pastor said one probably has to take some interpretation from each of the 4 views to get the most accurate interpretation.

Now, onto the Partial Preterist view as it wasn’t around during Hendricksen’s time. I seems I started hearing about it 10- 20 years ago mostly from some in the Ligonier crowd. It has been said that R.C. Sproul developed some emphasis in that interpretation. In a way the Partial Preterists do not differ much from the Historicists or Idealists except they wanted to be cute and fancy in their new-founded approach. However, I could be completely wrong on that.

OK, here is what I know or suspect with this view. They are post-mil, but not the ‘golden age’ type, they believe as me in that the millennial starts with Christ’s Resurrection and His Second Coming. I’m not sure how they would define the millennial. Another feature they have is that they (or least most of them) hold that John wrote Revelation before the Fall of Jerusalem, not in the early 90s AD as most biblical scholars believe. And finally, what influences them is their take on the verses that say Christ’s return will be soon. It seems as if they attempt to reconcile those verses into their Partial Preterist view.

So, what is a good precise definition of the Partial Preterist interpretation?


John Chaney

"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ." Colossians 2:7
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,323
Likes: 48
Head Honcho
Offline
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,323
Likes: 48
Quote
Partial-Preterism is the view that:

“[Most of] The prophecies contained in the Apocalypse were fulfilled with the destruction of the Jerusalem and the fall of heathen Rome. This is the view of Bossuet, Grotius, Hammond, Wetstein, Eichhorn, Ewald, De Wette, Lucke, and others, among whom is the American expositor, Moses Stuart.” – Charles Spurgeon

“The Preterist, which holds that all, or nearly all, the prophecies of the book were fulfilled in the early Christian ages, either in the history of the Jewish race up to A.D. 70, or in that of Pagan Rome up to the fourth or fifth century. With Hentensius and Salmeron as forerunners, the Jesuit Alcasar (1614) was the father of this school. To it belong Grotius, Bossuet, Hammond, LeClerc, Wetstein, Eichhorn, Herder, Hartwig, Koppe, Hug, Heinrichs, Ewald, De Wette, Bleek, Reuss, Reville, Renan, Desprez, S. Davidson, Stuart, Lucke, Dusterdieck, Maurice, Farrar, etc. ” – B.B. Warfield

The view hinges on an early date of the Book of Revelation (though not all those who hold to an early date are partial-preterists). The Antichrist is often taken as Nero, Titus, Caligula, or another prominent person during the 1st century.

Partial-Preterism can be further divided into Premillennial (Gordon Clark), Amillennial (Jay Adams) and Postmilllennial (American Reconstructionism, Greg Bahnsen, Kenneth Gentry, American Vision, etc.).
see also: https://www.theopedia.com/preterism


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,852
John_C Offline OP
Permanent Resident
OP Offline
Permanent Resident
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,852
But, wouldn't the Idealist view say practically the same thing as it relates to most (or many) prophecies being fulfilled before 70 AD. I'm still trying to find out why the Partial Preterist must be different from the Idealist interpretation. Is it just base on John writing Revelation in the late 60s AD instead of early 90s AD?

I ran across this article that helps some, but I'm not sure if the author is too bias and is somewhat flawed in his description of the Idealist interpretation.

https://www.ligonier.org/learn/arti...b6-usQa1Sxfi5o2uB_OeTyLmm_3ifXW3NGb7hwGE


John Chaney

"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ." Colossians 2:7
Joined: Aug 2022
Posts: 12
Plebeian
Offline
Plebeian
Joined: Aug 2022
Posts: 12
I think most Idealists would have no great issue with the term Partial Preterist, insofar as Idealists do believe in a historic fulfilment of prophecy (to whatever degree). If I understand correctly, one can hold to both Idealism and Partial Preterist views, just as truly as it is possible to hold to Amillennialism or Postmillennialism and a Partial Preterist viewpoint. But I guess I really probably should allow the Idealists to speak for themselves in this regard (I hold neither to Idealist views, nor do I at all -as a Historicist- favor the term "Partial Preterist" to describe my own views).

Nahum #58024 Sat Sep 10, 2022 4:02 AM
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,852
John_C Offline OP
Permanent Resident
OP Offline
Permanent Resident
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,852
Originally Posted by Nahum
I think most Idealists would have no great issue with the term Partial Preterist, insofar as Idealists do believe in a historic fulfilment of prophecy (to whatever degree). If I understand correctly, one can hold to both Idealism and Partial Preterist views, just as truly as it is possible to hold to Amillennialism or Postmillennialism and a Partial Preterist viewpoint. But I guess I really probably should allow the Idealists to speak for themselves in this regard (I hold neither to Idealist views, nor do I at all -as a Historicist- favor the term "Partial Preterist" to describe my own views).

As a Partial Preterist what are you views? That is really what I've been trying to find out.


John Chaney

"having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith . . ." Colossians 2:7
John_C #58027 Sat Sep 10, 2022 11:36 AM
Joined: Aug 2022
Posts: 12
Plebeian
Offline
Plebeian
Joined: Aug 2022
Posts: 12
I apologize if I was unclear in the way that I worded my response. I hold to a Historicist hermeneutical approach, and while it might not be entirely incorrect if I were to do so, I do not at all describe myself as a "Partial Preterist." I think Preterism is the most dangerous or deadly approach that one could take to the Scriptures, and I try to disassociate myself from even the name "Preterism," -although (as with so many things) there is some truth in a Partial Preterist concept.

Based on what I have read, it was the "Jesuits" who revived and popularized Preterism in its various forms, which they did for Counter Reformation purposes (i.e., to help heal the wounded head of the beast). Since I believe in multiple fulfilments of prophecy, I have no problem pointing to past historical events and acknowledging them as being specific fulfilments of prophecy, but I differ with preterists even so, in that I do not rule out the possibility or what I consider more in terms of the "fact" of a later fulfilment of the same prophecy.

Perhaps I will shock you with what I am about to say, but I think there is a certain sense in which even some of those prophecies which commonly are understood and rightly regarded as having reference to the "once for all" death of Christ, have also a second fulfilment.

Moses, being a prophet, or a true "man of God," smote the rock twice. In this there is a type of the generation of Antichrist, which under the name of "Christian" (whether as "ministers" or lay people) would crucify the Son of God afresh. Since they cannot reach Him, they will crucify (however they are able) His mystical members. And all of the long history of Antichrist/Babylon's murder of the saints culminates in the beast's final attack and spiritual murder (i.e., by means of demonic forces) of the two witnesses (see Dn. 8:9-26, esp. (vss. 10, 24-25) & Dn. 11:32-39 (esp. vss. 33 & 39) with Rev. 11:7-10). This is extremely significant, because we are speaking here of the last little remnant of true believers who keep the testimony of Jesus when even the outer court, or, the visible Church has been given over to the Gentiles (or practical pagans) that they might "tread it underfoot" (Rev. 11:1-2).

But just as Christ was raised again on the third day, he will raise up also (or revive again) his little remnant:

"COME, and let us return unto the LORD: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up. After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight. Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the LORD: his going forth is prepared as the morning; and he shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the earth." Hos. 6:1-3

"And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them. And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them." Rev. 11:11-12

God gave us a hymn to sing about this story of which I now speak. It is Psalm 89, -particularly verses 38-51. I do not deny that there is reference to the crucifixion of Christ (the forerunner) in these verses, but it is speaking of something even beyond that. Verses 38-51 do come as following after the anointing (or ministry), the ascension, and the Session of Christ at the Father's right hand, -which things are all mentioned in the earlier section: vss. 20-37 particularly. That verses 38-51 have reference also to Christ's members, especially in the time of apostasy and spiritual war following after the Millennium, -when the "thrones" are cast down (see Rev. 20:4 & 7-9 with Dn. 7:9), is clear from the following places and considerations:

As already mentioned, this section (38-51) follows in order after the ascension and Session of Christ.

God's covenant with "David" (vss. 35-36) meaning Christ the true "Messiah" (vs. 20), which, in the sad description within this Psalm was seemingly "made void" (vs. 39) includes in it also his spiritual seed and members (vs. 36); which consideration brings us prepared for the next observation:

Things such as the breaking down of the hedges (vs. 40), being made a spoil and a reproach to neighbors (vs. 41), being made not to stand in battle, -the right hand of the adversaries being set up above us (vss. 42 & 43), and the experience of shortened days (vs. 45) &c., all have reference to things of this life which things usually, in Scripture, describe times of judgement upon the Church.

And lastly, verses 49-51 actually tell us that these things have reference to Christ's mystical members through the use of the plural "servants" in verse 50. (See 49-51)

Psalm 102 also hints at some of these sad latter-day fulfilments of prophecy, which correspond with the idea of the rock being twice struck. But (as is more apparent in Psalm 102), this is not the end of the story, for when this "little corner stone" (being the true members of Christ, -who is the "Chief Cornerstone" -Eph. 2:20) has been fully cut out of the mountain, it will smite the ugly Babylon/Antichristian image in the feet which will totally destroy it (see Dn. 2, esp. vss. 34-35). Jesus is Lord, and He is victorious! While it may be very true that these present days are the darkest of days, it is also nevertheless true that the very best times for the elect Church are soon to come!


Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 147 guests, and 8 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
His Unworthy Son, Nahum, TheSojourner, Larry, Nana Dadzie Jr.
973 Registered Users
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
December
S M T W T F S
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Popular Topics(Views)
1,404,034 Gospel truth