Are you preterist or merely 'modified post-trib'?

[Grace777x70]

Because it doesn't require one of our man-made labels. It is simply reading the Bible for what is there, instead of trying to invent extraneous things not present. For instance, we humans had to really make a stretch of the words, "this generation", to make them mean something 2,000 years (or a lot more) off into the future, instead of those words applying to the men standing right there that Jesus was answering.

But, we did. And now we have even labeled it.

I agree...what we do is read scriptures through the eyes of a western evangelical . One of the things that has helped me to understand the scriptures is the fact that "God is not an evangelical.". And I say that speaking as an evangelical in some of my beliefs and I was certainly taught those beliefs in my church upbringing.

 

[Spurgeoncy]

Hmmm, it is just a shorthand though.

Instead of saying: "You are seeing everything for future fulfilment" I just say "you are a futurist".

If we do the other in English rather than Latin, you would say "You see everything as fulfilled, you are a Pastie"

It is just the Latin that confuses people like me.

If someone said are you "a Pastie", I would like that. "Yes I am a Pastie"

 

[eternally-gratefull]

What is really odd is that if Partial Preterism is the overwhelmingly orthodox position of the Church pre-Scofield, why doesn't it have it's own name?

When people talk about Preterism, they are referring to a really odd set of beliefs. It is actually odd that partial-Preterism and Preterism share the same name, as if the two are connected.

Why not Preterism and Adventism, then the labels would actually make more sense.

We used to call it amill. vs pre-mill (amill believed we were in th emillenium or 1000 years. and it is a spiritual kingdom. Premill believes that we are pre 1000 year and it is a physical kingdom (pretrib, mid trib and post trib would fit in this thinking).

I never heard of preterism until I came to CC.. All these terms can be confusing.

as for preterism being orthodox. The roman church had many heresies, and if you went against her you were in danger.. so it is not A big surprise that premill thinking did not come before in church (roman) history.. And ps, it did not start with Scofield. that is another thinking that has took hold which is not true.

 

[Willie-T]

I agree...what we do is read scriptures through the eyes of a western evangelical . One of the things that has helped me to understand the scriptures is the fact that "God is not an evangelical.". And I say that speaking as an evangelical in some of my beliefs and I was certainly taught those beliefs in my church upbringing.

A Preacher friend used to use the term, "Put on your sandals." when reading the Bible, or even thinking about it. Doing so has made a world of difference in how I see the words written way back then.

 

[Spurgeoncy]

Hmmm, it is just a shorthand though.

Instead of saying: "You are seeing everything for future fulfilment" I just say "you are a futurist".

If we do the other in English rather than Latin, you would say "You see everything as fulfilled, you are a Pastie"

It is just the Latin that confuses people like me.

If someone said are you "a Pastie", I would like that. "Yes I am a Pastie"

But they are not definitions, they are just labels. Convenient ways of keeping things simple. General opening statements.

What I have seen people do a lot of, cough cough, is call someone a blankblank-ist and then criticize blankblankism rather than what that person actually says, which is of course downright dishonest.

It is perfectly legitimate to say:

"I am a Futurist, but I don't agree with A B and C"

It is just a way of saying something as an outline without using a million words.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Iagree...what we do is read scriptures through the eyes of a western evangelical . One of the things that has helped me to understand the scriptures is the fact that "God is not an evangelical.". And I say that speaking as an evangelical in some of my beliefs and I was certainly taught those beliefs in my church upbringing.

I think if you look at many so called church doctrines. You will see most of them are views from a certain perspective.

The best thing I have learned is to look at it from the ORIGIONAL audience point of view and not aome churchy point of view.

This change my thinking in many areas..

 

[PlainWord]

So much confusion about what is actually taught compared to what people believe.

1. The "great tribulation" of Mat 24:21 is over. It dealt with the destruction of Israel and Jerusalem. It was God's vengeance upon His people for failing to stop sinning and for not making amends for their iniquities. Daniel 9 teaches that God agreed to restore them to their Land, but with conditions. He gave them 490 years to meet these conditions. Instead they killed His Son, so His wrath was poured out in 70 AD and they ceased being a nation. Daniel 9 is over. The desolation of Jerusalem was not within those 490 years, it came some 36-40 years later to allow the Gospel to be preached to all nations. Jesus finishes discussing 70 AD events after V26 and transitions to His return.

2. The "tribulation of those days" which Jesus mentioned in V29 which precedes His return, does not refer back to V21 but refers back just one verse to V28. The "carcass" (body) and "eagles" (scavenger birds) relate to Rev 19:17-21 which is Armageddon. This is where the wicked are taken to be "punished." It is this tribulation which Jesus' return follows.

3. In Rev 20, John uses the term "first resurrection" as a figurative way of saying "born again" which is also figurative. Unless one is born again, one cannot see or enter the Kingdom of God. We believers are born twice but die once. Unbelievers are born once but die twice. For us who are born of the spirit, we will not face the second death which is the spiritual death.

Bottom line: Christ returns just once. When Christ appears, but before He actually returns, God will make Christ's enemies His footstool. The wicked will endure tribulation vengeance for their wicked ways. Since we are believers, we are not appointed to this wrath. There is no need for anyone to be raptured off the planet to avoid the tribulation because we are told the wicked (tares) are taken and we are gathered into the barn. I hope this helps.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Hmmm, it is just a shorthand though.

Instead of saying: "You are seeing everything for future fulfilment" I just say "you are a futurist".

If we do the other in English rather than Latin, you would say "You see everything as fulfilled, you are a Pastie"

It is just the Latin that confuses people like me.

If someone said are you "a Pastie", I would like that. "Yes I am a Pastie"

But they are not definitions, they are just labels. Convenient ways of keeping things simple. General opening statements.

What I have seen people do a lot of, cough cough, is call someone a blankblank-ist and then criticize blankblankism rather than what that person actually says, which is of course downright dishonest.

It is perfectly legitimate to say:

"I am a Futurist, but I don't agree with A B and C"

It is just a way of saying something as an outline without using a million words.

thats why labeling is bad.

If I say I am a pre-mil. It is assumed it means I am Pretrib, and think Isreal is saved by law, and will return to be saved by law in the trib. Which is not true. Not even scofield taught this, although he is slandered as saying this very thing from some preterists, or a-mill or whatever you call them..lol

 

[Spurgeoncy]

I always thought Preterists believed that Jesus second Coming was in AD70, so when people started calling me a Preterist, I thought these people were barking mad. Then I denied it, and they carried on with the accusation.

 

[Willie-T]

I always thought Preterists believed that Jesus second Coming was in AD70, so when people started calling me a Preterist, I thought these people were barking mad. Then I denied it, and they carried on with the accusation.

This is mainly why we label others.... so we can dehumanize them, and subjectively ridicule them as non entities.

 

[LaurenTM]

I think this is the crust of the issue. Some can not do this. They want to make it a Slavic issue, and claim you can;t be a pre-mill, and be saved

And that is what made those threads, and historical threads very heated.. And why Lauren made such comments as she did.. And you see the result..

People are not sick of the discussion. They are sick of the Judgment and hate from a few select people..

someone mention my pseudonym?

could not get the spelling right on pseudonym and when I tried the first time on google it gave me 'did you mean psycho'

only on CC...only on CC

 

[iamsoandso]

It's pretty simple really either the beast the image the Aob the trib. ect has already taken place and so there's nothing for us to worry about in the future and so we can let our guard down,or all these things haven’t yet happened and they are going to happen and so we should keep our guard up so we wont be caught up in it. All I suppose past this is for someone to either explain which is which,which is where we are.

 

[PlainWord]

It's pretty simple really either the beast the image the Aob the trib. ect has already taken place and so there's nothing for us to worry about in the future and so we can let our guard down,or all these things haven’t yet happened and they are going to happen and so we should keep our guard up so we wont be caught up in it. All I suppose past this is for someone to either explain which is which,which is where we are.

There is another option. The A of D and the tribulation happened back in 70 AD and the Beast of Rev 13 is future. I don't see anything to link them together.

 

[MattTooFor]

I don't believe in pretrib rapture.

Not sure how you define preterist..your definitions are kind of muddled.

I believe all positions believe in judgement day.,so that should be common ground.

As for your question...no. Preterist arent just modified post-trib

Well, I wasn't really offering a definition...other than what my impressions are from reading some of the comments from Prets (is that an acceptable shortening?).

And so from what I have heard and read...I think I might in fact view many Prets as modified post-tribbers:

If they believe Christians are slated to go through many trials and tribulations on this earth...and if they're observant enough of world affairs to understand its not a matter of "IF" but rather "WHEN" America is going head into calamity, economic collapse and wholesale persecution of Christians...and then at the end of all the troubles, trial and tribulations which believers are destined for...that we will then be transported to heaven ("raptured") to be with Jesus...that is a PRETTY CLOSE fit to my worldview.

All the other stuff about which resurrection happens when and which "bowl" or "trumpet" or "whistle" fits here or there...maybe God will forgive some of us if we haven't put all the puzzle pieces in the right place. I feel that I HAVE placed all the puzzle pieces correctly but...I try to stay open to correction.

 

[MattTooFor]

I do not believe the eternal home of the saved is heaven.. I believe there shall be a new heaven and a New earth and we shall live with Jesus in the New Jerusalem which will come out of heaven and down to the new earth.. We shall be living on the new earth for eternity..

The belief that we do not spend eternity in heaven is Bible based.. You only have to read the last chapters of the Book of Revelation to see this clearly revealed..

"Going to heaven" is just an expression for me. I fully understand and accept that the New Jerusalem is our eternal home...and the "new heaven and earth".

 

[Ariel82]

No you are missing a big puzzle piece..,, the 1000 years....all you are looking at is the Rapture.

 

[MattTooFor]

He holds the man of lawlessness will appear and lead the final rebellion.

Hmmm. Now that you mention it...that IS a rather serious sticking point I would have with Preterists -- the reality of a coming world ruler who will demand our acceptance of the so-called "mark of the beast".

First of all, for Prets...when are they claiming such an extraordinary demand was ever made in history past? When was such a conspicuous thing ever seen being implemented in history past? Where is there a record of such a thing ever happening?

And secondly, Jesus seems to indicate in Matthew 25, it requires a very focused sense of impending "darkness" (in His parable of the Ten Virgins) and a very specific preparation (filling one's lamp with oil), apparently a spiritual preparation to prepare for the time of darkness which precedes His return.

And those who do NOT prepare are described as ending up in a state of "wailing and gnashing of teeth".

So...I don't know. That's a tough call for me: Prets who dismiss all of these specific warnings and yet prepare and brace themselves in a general way for all the trials and tribulations of life...will they have the presence of mind to do the right thing when the New World Order breaks out and a satanic world leader explodes onto the world scene?

It would be very interesting to run into Prets who are savvy enough in their geo-political views to understand there is an emerging world order and one which is heavily steeped in occultism/satanism...and yet those same Preterists would deny the applicability of all these scriptures which predicted the "mark of the beast" scenarios in "end times".

I believe it is a very dangerous thing...to NOT prepare spiritually, specifically for a "mark of the beast" scenario.

 

[MattTooFor]

"angels" to gather the elect. Isn't this the rapture? No.

OK well...that is waaay to 'non-literal' for me. And that is amazingly arbitrary to me.

BUT...my previous points still stand (I think): If there are Prets out there who, because of their savvy worldviews, are aware and braced for calamitous troubles, economic collapse (etc.) in the near future...HUGE persecutions against believers right here in America...after which God will take us to heaven...there's a lot of common ground there.

 

[MattTooFor]

No you are missing a big puzzle piece..,, the 1000 years....all you are looking at is the Rapture.

Who me? No, I understand and believe in a 1000 year kingdom. Why did you think I didn't?

 

[PlainWord]

No you are missing a big puzzle piece..,, the 1000 years....all you are looking at is the Rapture.

This 1000 years?

Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. [SUP]5 [/SUP]But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Where do you find souls, heaven or on earth? If someone has been beheaded and you see their souls wouldn't that indicate they are in heaven and not back on earth with new glorified bodies? You don't think they get resurrected without their heads do you?