Polycarp

[Uriah]

1 hour ago, Justin Adams said:

Ad hominin and non sequitur. No one I know has mentioned an 'early' 'second coming'.

However, a certain Judgement from the Lord did befall Jerusalem in 70AD.

The Lord's Second Coming will be at the end of time as we know it. No dispensations and no pre-trib raptures. Just a second coming in Power and Glory.

Well then it looks like we are on the same page. Was confused by the Gentry ref.

[Justin Adams]

1 minute ago, Uriah said:

Well then it looks like we are on the same page. Was confused by the Gentry ref.

If you read his dissertation, that might help. Like most I have met, he is of a partial-preterist persuasion, but would never deny the future Day of the Lord.

We are all part preterists and part futurists if you consider that.

Now I have read some of the hyper-preterists and some of the hyper-Calvinists; they are both to be avoided I think.

[Uriah]

8 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

If you read his dissertation, that might help. Like most I have met, he is of a partial-preterist persuasion, but would never deny the future Day of the Lord.

We are all part preterists and part futurists if you consider that.

Now I have read some of the hyper-preterists and some of the hyper-Calvinists; they are both to be avoided I think.

Well, maybe its just my memory, or he has "updated". Pretty sure he was known for full blown pret.

[Alive]

2 hours ago, kingdombrat said:

I was under the impression you believed, or some who follow Preterism believe 70 A.D. kicks off the Mill Reign [which some attach to the Second Coming].   The intent with Polycarp is to enlighten readers that the Church Body in 150 A.D. still were awaiting for both [Second Coming/Mill Reign].

Yes--a wrong impression. The information has been available in these threads to have avoided that. This is why these discussions are necessary and a careful reading required...or relevant questions asked and answered.

One significant difference being discussed is whether or not there is a literal 1000 years reign taught in scripture--as the dispensationalists describe it. And whether there is a rapture prior to that literal 1000 year period. Some folks think the 1000 years is not literal and started at Pentecost or thereabouts. And of course the issue of when the events in Revelation occurred.

In my view--there are very good reasons for consideration that may be different than what we have believed.

Yes--we are all partial preterists. Gentry is a partial pret.

When I read Gentry, I had no dog in this fight. I can honestly say that. He does a bang up job of looking at all sides of these things and in my opinion, as I have stated before---I have seldom, if ever, read such a transparently honest attempt.

Gentry draws from an incredibly rich well of source material and the reader will learn a great deal--whether his conclusion is agreeable or not. I promise this.

[Guest kingdombrat]

2 minutes ago, Alive said:

Yes--a wrong impression. The information has been available in these threads to have avoided that. This is why these discussions are necessary and a careful reading required...or relevant questions asked and answered.

One significant difference being discussed is whether or not there is a literal 1000 years reign taught in scripture--as the dispensationalists describe it. And whether there is a rapture prior to that literal 1000 year period. Some folks think the 1000 years is not literal and started at Pentecost or thereabouts. And of course the issue of when the events in Revelation occurred.

In my view--there are very good reasons for consideration that may be different than what we have believed.

Yes--we are all partial preterists. Gentry is a partial pret.

When I read Gentry, I had no dog in this fight. I can honestly say that. He does a bang up job of looking at all sides of these things and in my opinion, as I have stated before---I have seldom, if ever, read such a transparently honest attempt.

Gentry draws from an incredibly rich well of source material and the reader will learn a great deal--whether his conclusion is agreeable or not. I promise this.

I always was of the belief preterism [only] related to the 70 A.D. Destruction because (some preterist) claims "All Prophecy" was fulfilled at this Event.   But as I began reading more responses a second time through, I am now thinking Preterism has 2 specific views.

1) All Prophecy was fulfilled at the 70 A.D. Destruction

2) Prophecy that [has been] fulfilled is Preterism with a secondary belief of Futurism for the unfulfilled Prophecies.

 

If Preterism is #2, then I would have to fit that Category.

If Preterism is #1, I believe this is a False Doctrine.

 

But #2 Preterism is NEW to me in Concept.   This is the first time I've ever had it explained this way.   And it does worry me a bit, because the term Preterism has always before meant all Prophecy is fulfilled, and we might as well toss the Bible into the trash when studying Prophecy itself concerning the future.

 

When did Preterism split in Concept?

The #2 Preterism has to be a roughly newer idealism, or just no one has ever explained like I've read within this Thread.

 

I'm all about [old dogs] learning new tricks!

[Alive]

14 minutes ago, kingdombrat said:

But #2 Preterism is NEW to me in Concept.   This is the first time I've ever had it explained this way.   And it does worry me a bit, because the term Preterism has always before meant all Prophecy is fulfilled, and we might as well toss the Bible into the trash when studying Prophecy itself concerning the future.

 

I see this as a problem and one of the points that does show us that our views of eschatology can affect our walk.

Please understand, I'm being critical, but I am being critical in examination.

Even if most prophecy has been fulfilled, why would I toss out the scriptures. Prophecy fulfillment is a remarkable and compelling faith builder.

Christ's discussion of the temple destruction, the saving of the elect in that tribulation is remarkably accurate as history declares. What He said was absolutely absurd to those that heard Him and yet it happened.

We know these things and so we look for His return with an added assurance----etc.

If, for the sake of this discussion, we are always looking for what has already happened rather than at what we ought to be doing--the Great Commission--then this would be a mistake. How much time and effort and even sweat has been expended. 

Have anyone considered what subject takes up the most space at this Worthy forum?

[Guest kingdombrat]

22 minutes ago, Alive said:

I see this as a problem and one of the points that does show us that our views of eschatology can affect our walk.

Please understand, I'm being critical, but I am being critical in examination.

Even if most prophecy has been fulfilled, why would I toss out the scriptures. Prophecy fulfillment is a remarkable and compelling faith builder.

Christ's discussion of the temple destruction, the saving of the elect in that tribulation is remarkably accurate as history declares. What He said was absolutely absurd to those that heard Him and yet it happened.

We know these things and so we look for His return with an added assurance----etc.

If, for the sake of this discussion, we are always looking for what has already happened rather than at what we ought to be doing--the Great Commission--then this would be a mistake. How much time and effort and even sweat has been expended. 

Have anyone considered what subject takes up the most space at this Worthy forum?

To toss the Bible into the trash, because all Prophecy has been fulfilled.   Is merely a stupid cynical expression, that yes it's good examine past Prophecy, but if all is fulfilled, there is only Death to look forward to in order to get to the next life.   And of course, that is not a very good example of a victorious walk in God at all.

 

Oddly enough though, when we're still looking forward as the Church Body in 150 A.D. was, for the Glorious return of Christ and His Physical Reign.   We have more emphasis of importance in the current now, because we still have hope in Seeing Our Lord and Savior return.   

 

Even though both outcomes still Guarantee us Eternal Life with God, unfulfilled Prophecy, is Spiritually life giving to many who are struggling in every day and need that Hope for His Return.

 

Yes, that can lead to False Doctrines, because giving Hope to others is extremely profitable.

But when we have Accounts like Polycarp's [still Looking for Christ's Return and Reign in the year 150 A.D.], That same Hope then is Valuable for the Hopes we now have.

 

   

[Uriah]

2 hours ago, Justin Adams said:

We are all part preterists and part futurists if you consider that.

What does that mean?

Dictionary (.com)-a person who maintains that the prophecies in the Apocalypse have already been fulfilled. Compare futurist

To be a preterist, must one believe Jesus already came?

Edited May 14, 2021 by Uriah
word-"one"

[Guest kingdombrat]

13 minutes ago, Josheb said:

It's not a very good representation of full-preterism, either. It is instead a gross straw man leading to a gross red herring. 

If all the prophesies have been fulfilled the precepts and truth are not diminished in any way. In fact it is because the predictions have all come true that we can rely upon scripture as truth and rely upon it even thousands of years later. 

That is what full-prets believe. Every Christin believes this in one way or another; some simply look for some prophesy......... to still yet be proven true. For the record: I am not a full-pret. 

And non-futurists think it is insane to look forward to the destruction of the world as truth when we could be looking forward to increasing victory in light of the confidence much (or all) of prophecy has already been fulfilled. 

 

No need to throw the Bible in the trash. 

You and myself have already discussed how we believe things repeat from the examples in the Bible to historical values.

 

When the Bible was only about the Hebrew Peoples/not the acceptance of the Gentiles, eventually God slams the Jews in 70 A.D. and there is a lesson for the Jews to learn [a Second Chance] for those who escaped.

 

For the past 2,000 years, it's been the Gentile Era that makes up the majority of God's People.   And like the Old Testament Jews till Jesus' Day, the Gentile Believers have followed the same circumstances we read about with the Ancient Hebrew/Jewish Peoples.

 

If God slams the Nation of Israel in 70 A.D. for these [sins/disobedience's], logic would state God will slam the entire world because of the sins/disobedience of the Gentiles.   And it would open the door to restore Israel for those who have now accepted Christ as their Messiah.

 

Why do we think that won't happen? 

[Alive]

1 hour ago, kingdombrat said:

To toss the Bible into the trash, because all Prophecy has been fulfilled.   Is merely a stupid cynical expression, that yes it's good examine past Prophecy, but if all is fulfilled, there is only Death to look forward to in order to get to the next life.   And of course, that is not a very good example of a victorious walk in God at all.

 

Oddly enough though, when we're still looking forward as the Church Body in 150 A.D. was, for the Glorious return of Christ and His Physical Reign.   We have more emphasis of importance in the current now, because we still have hope in Seeing Our Lord and Savior return.   

 

Even though both outcomes still Guarantee us Eternal Life with God, unfulfilled Prophecy, is Spiritually life giving to many who are struggling in every day and need that Hope for His Return.

 

Yes, that can lead to False Doctrines, because giving Hope to others is extremely profitable.

But when we have Accounts like Polycarp's [still Looking for Christ's Return and Reign in the year 150 A.D.], That same Hope then is Valuable for the Hopes we now have.

 

   

I have eternal Life, now and it will be manifested one way or the other and I am looking for His glorious return.

Maranatha!