Let's talk to each other around the Word ..

[Covenanter]

It seems every topic here is hijacked by people who attack "Preterism" from their own ignorance of the doctrine, throwing out of context texts & concepts that they "know" are unanswerable.

No amount of careful presentation of systematic Scripture teaching can either convince them or even persuade them that we are true Christians who know Jesus as Lord & Saviour with a Holy Spirit guided understanding of the precious Word of God.

I'd like us to use this thread for Preterists to discuss the Scriptures, our agreements & disagreements so that we can come every closer in our understanding.

Please, antipreterists, keep to other threads. You can look here, but please don't post.

[Covenanter]

I have moved from the historical interpretation of Revelation to a (partial) Preterist interpretation. From my conversion over 50 years ago I never heard any teaching other than that John's visions & his "Revelation" were in the 90s. The Neronic date was dismissed summarily because of Irenaeus' reference.

I have never questioned the basic ad 70 fulfillment of the Olivet prophecies, but questioned the "heavenly" signs that suggest certain events will take place when Jesus returns at the end of time for resurrection & judgement. I now see that such events are references to the OT & judgments of other nations. (e.g Babylon - Isaiah 13 & Egypt in Ezekiel 32.) Many other Scriptures could be quoted.

I have considered & rejected the "dispensational" interpretation that removes the prophesied events to a yet future occasion separate from the age in which we live.

Let's start with the millennium - Rev. 20 -
When did it start?
When did or will it end?
When was Satan bound?
When was or will he be released for a little season?
Where is he now?
Is there any demonic activity today?
If Satan is bound, why is there so much wickedness?

[Happy22]

Chronologically, according to Rev 20 (the only place in all of Scripture that the "millenium" is mentioned), Satan is first thrown into the Abyss with a great chain holding him down so that he is powerless throughout the duration of the millenium.

At the end of the "millenium" he is released, for only a short time, so that he can "gather the nations to war against the 'camp of the saints' (which is the Christian Church in Jerusalem).

The war spoken of is Armageddon.

Most Futurists today claim that Satan is alive and well and performing his dirty work.  Most are also claiming that Jesus' return, His "Second Coming", is imminent. (They also refuse to admit that His return is in judgment of the twelve tribes of Israel).

If Satan is alive and well as the Futurists claim he is, then according to Rev 20 either

the millenium has already transpired and Satan has been unchained and has been released from his prison in the Abyss to gather the nations to war against the camp of the saints (not to mention that the "first resurrection" also mentioned in Rev 20 that takes place during the "millenium" must have also
already taken place)-

or

the millenium is still in the future (because of Satan's rampant activity going on presently, as they claim).

This is their dilemma. If they insist that Satan is running rampant and that Jesus' "Second Coming" is imminent, then their millenium has already taken place.

Then to make their version of Rev 20 more confusing and unexplainable- the passage points out that Satan is unable to attack the 'camp of the saints' because just a moment before Armageddon commences, Satan is thrown alive into the "lake of fire" (where the beast and the false prophet are)
where he is tormented day and night for ever and forever.

This is just one of many contradictions to Scripture that the Futurists cannot explain.

All they can do is ignore and hide from the facts.  And claim that preterism is false teaching and that a Preterist is a member of a cult.

[Covenanter]

Thanks, Happy for your contribution.

My basic thoughts are that during Jesus' lifetime demon activity was intense & affected all sort of people including children in an extent unknown since. 

Jesus bound Satan with his victory at Calvary, & issued the "great commission" to take the Gospel to all nations. The nations were therefore no longer deceived. The children of the Devil (John 8) of that generation died out, finally with the ad 70 destruction. The "millennium" dates from the resurrection, & took full effect from ad 70. The old covenant centred on Jerusalem was absolutely ended, & all the physical symbols destroyed.

The new (& everlasting) covenant centred on Jesus & the new Jerusalem took effect with Jesus' resurrection, & was fully implemented with the total elimination of of the earthly Jerusalem.

The evil influence of Satan is evident - even from the abyss - is seen in Rev. 17. Mankind is evil by nature, & the cross did not change that. Only new kingdom life given through the Gospel changes human nature fo rthe redeemed people of God.

I am not convinced by the full Preterist arguments - such texts as: 30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. (Acts 17) teach a day of judgement other than ad 70 & other than death. 1 Cor. 15 & 1 Thes. 4 & 2 Thes. 1 are readily understood as teaching a personal & final return of Jesus for resurrection & judgement.

God created a perfect world by his Word in 6 days. Will the present evil system continue indefinitely? I look for a perfect renewal & the removal from his kingdom (& creation) of all that is evil. It's well within the power of our creator God.

Before that final coming, Rev. 20 teaches a final rebellion of the nations with Satan's release, which occasions a final fiery judgment.

[Happy22]

Amazingly, those today who hold to Premillennial Dispensationalism, believe similarly that Jesus did not establish His eternal kingdom to accord with Daniel's prophecy, but that He postponed it, they say. So both the apostate Jews of the first century and modern day dispensationalists believe Jesus failed in His attempt at establishing the eternal kingdom as prophesied by Daniel. Many Jews today, as well as modern dispensationalists, are waiting for Jesus to establish His kingdom-the kingdom, by the way, Colossian believers had been translated into (Colossians 1:13) as was John and those to whom he wrote. (Revelation 1:9) Apostate Judaism rejected Jesus as their Messiah because they believed He failed to establish the promised kingdom. Similarly, modern day dispensationalists believe Him to have failed in His attempt in establishing the promised kingdom. Many Jews are still waiting for the advent of the Messiah while modern dispensationalists gratuitously believe that He will, in the future, make another attempt at establishing the kingdom having failed to do so the first time.

[raggthyme13]

Thank you for starting this thread! I hope that it can be the one place (in a Preterist forum) that Preterists can actually discuss amongst themselves. Perhaps we should just ignore the non-preterist posts here. That's really the only way to keep on track IMO.

Personally, I'm not sure whether I take a full or partial Preterist view.. still working through many questions and scriptures that seem to lean both ways. One thing I know for sure, you cannot discount a person's faith in Jesus as Savior and Lord by their eschatological position. I used to be a dispensationalist, and now I see things MUCH differently in the prophecy dept. Yet my faith in God as King has not changed a bit. I still teach my children what Jesus came to do for mankind, and how God wants us to walk by faith in His finished work.

Yes, we are indeed Christians, even though we are called deceivers by some. Let them say what they will, they don't know us personally.

Looking forward to learning with you folks :)

[Covenanter]

Parousia - presence or coming ?

And when he is sitting on the mount of the Olives, the disciples came near to him by himself, saying, `Tell us, when shall these be? and what [is] the sign of thy presence, and of the full end of the age?' Mat. 24:3 Young's Literal Translation.

We are conditioned to look for the second "coming" of our Lord, & to react against Jehovah's Witness teaching that parousia means "presence."

We should not read into the disciples' question our own understanding, as if they were asking about Jesus coming at the end of time. Nor should we take Jesus' answer as the answer to our own understanding of the question. A question may be indicative of a lack of understanding.

Fast forward to 28:18 And having come near, Jesus spake to them, saying, `Given to me was all authority in heaven and on earth;
19 having gone, then, disciple all the nations, (baptizing them -- to the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,
20 teaching them to observe all, whatever I did command you,) and lo, I am with you all the days -- till the full end of the age.'
YLT

If Jesus is with us always, we have his constant presence - normally unseen, but constant nevertheless. There are many times in our lives we are specially conscious of Jesus presence.

Especially when he calls us to himself for salvation (e.g. Saul); when we meet in his name; when we suffer for his name; when we witness for his name (Stephen) & when we are dying.

His presence at the destruction was extraordinary, in that it was to the ungodly.

Any comments?

[raggthyme13]

Parousia - presence or coming ?

And when he is sitting on the mount of the Olives, the disciples came near to him by himself, saying, `Tell us, when shall these be? and what [is] the sign of thy presence, and of the full end of the age?' Mat. 24:3 Young's Literal Translation.

We are conditioned to look for the second "coming" of our Lord, & to react against Jehovah's Witness teaching that parousia means "presence."

We should not read into the disciples' question our own understanding, as if they were asking about Jesus coming at the end of time. Nor should we take Jesus' answer as the answer to our own understanding of the question. A question may be indicative of a lack of understanding.

Fast forward to 28:18 And having come near, Jesus spake to them, saying, `Given to me was all authority in heaven and on earth;
19 having gone, then, disciple all the nations, (baptizing them -- to the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,
20 teaching them to observe all, whatever I did command you,) and lo, I am with you all the days -- till the full end of the age.'
YLT

If Jesus is with us always, we have his constant presence - normally unseen, but constant nevertheless. There are many times in our lives we are specially conscious of Jesus presence.

Especially when he calls us to himself for salvation (e.g. Saul); when we meet in his name; when we suffer for his name; when we witness for his name (Stephen) & when we are dying.

His presence at the destruction was extraordinary, in that it was to the ungodly.

Any comments?

This is one place I get confused.. didn't the apostles say the end of the age was upon them? In context, it seems Jesus would be speaking specifically to them about being with them (to empower them) as they made disciples of the nations (ends of the earth, whole world etc) unto the end of that age, which apparently came to pass in the first century.

I don't deny that the Lord is with all who call on his name.. I'm just not sure that we can apply a scripture like 28:18 to us, living in the "ages to come."

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Thank you for starting this thread! I hope that it can be the one place (in a Preterist forum) that Preterists can actually discuss amongst themselves. Perhaps we should just ignore the non-preterist posts here. That's really the only way to keep on track IMO.

I can help with that.  Just let me know if this thread (just this one) is being hijacked and I can clean it up.

Jarrod

[Covenanter]

Thanks, Jarrod

[Covenanter]

There is a tremendous emphasis on the Kingom, especially in Matthew.

When Jesus had completed his "kingdom parables" he asked his disciples: 51 Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They gave an easy answer - They say unto him, Yea, Lord. As the story continues, it seems they still had a lot to learn, as have we.

We are NOT waiting for Jesus' Kingdom - we are living in it.

[Covenanter]

This is one place I get confused.. didn't the apostles say the end of the age was upon them? In context, it seems Jesus would be speaking specifically to them about being with them (to empower them) as they made disciples of the nations (ends of the earth, whole world etc) unto the end of that age, which apparently came to pass in the first century.

Yes - the end was imminent - the end of the old covenant age with all its earthly manifestations, particularly the temple & the sacrificial system. After the transition period & the complete end in ad 70, we are now full y under teh new covenant (everlating covenant) administration.

I don't deny that the Lord is with all who call on his name.. I'm just not sure that we can apply a scripture like 28:18 to us, living in the "ages to come."

What are the alternatives? If Jesus was with his Apostles & those who believed the Gospel they preached during those 40 years of turmoil, surely he continues with us. I do not think we should apply the NT Scriptures only to those to whom they were written. The letters to the 7 churches were also to everyone with an ear. We can look at our own churches & examine ourselves by those letters.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

There is a tremendous emphasis on the Kingom, especially in Matthew.

When Jesus had completed his "kingdom parables" he asked his disciples: 51 Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They gave an easy answer - They say unto him, Yea, Lord. As the story continues, it seems they still had a lot to learn, as have we.

We are NOT waiting for Jesus' Kingdom - we are living in it.

I'd go farther.  I'd say that IS the gospel message.  "The kingdom of God is at hand."

"At hand" just means "right here."

Jarrod

[Stormcrow]

Let's start with the millennium - Rev. 20 -
When did it start?
When did or will it end?
When was Satan bound?
When was or will he be released for a little season?
Where is he now?
Is there any demonic activity today?
If Satan is bound, why is there so much wickedness?

Well, there are a couple of interpretations possible here regarding the millennium...

If the thousand years are literal, they can be seen as the span of time from David to Christ.  I personally have a problem with this view, because so much happened to Israel during this period (4 of the 5 "desolations" of the land Josephus describes) among other things.  However, this view does seem to fit the thousand year time-frame of the millennium if one approaches it literally.

I, for one, do not.  "Thousand" in the Bible is often used to connote a large but indeterminate number, and so is not to be taken literally.  An example of this is found in the Psalms:

For every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. Psalm 50:10 (ESV)

Clearly, the context of this passage was not to tell the reader that God owned the cattle on only a thousand hills, but that He owned every single head of cattle everywhere.  To read this verse's use of the word "thousand" literally is to suggest that someone else owns the cattle on the other hills that God doesn't.  It's a ridiculous idea and yet when the same literalism is applied to John's use of the word "thousand" in Revelation 20, you get equally absurd justifications from the dispy/futurist crowd.

My view is that John - like Peter - is trying to convey the idea that the period of time from Christ's first advent to His parousia would be a long time period of indeterminate length; something 40 years would certainly fulfill. 

[Stormcrow]

Parousia - presence or coming ?

I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger. Jeremiah 4:26 (KJV)

As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming presence, and of the end of the age?" Matthew 24:3 (NASB)

God was as present at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD as He was when He judged it in 586 BC; His presence being manifest in the instruments of His judgment (in the two cases cited above, the Romans and Babylonians respectively.) 

As to whether His presence would be spiritual or physical, I believe this verse answers that question quite nicely:

"For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst." Matthew 18:20 (NASB)

Christ's physical presence is not required for His spiritual presence to affect human outcomes.

[Covenanter]

Let's start with the millennium - Rev. 20 -
When did it start?
When did or will it end?
When was Satan bound?
When was or will he be released for a little season?
Where is he now?
Is there any demonic activity today?
If Satan is bound, why is there so much wickedness?

Well, there are a couple of interpretations possible here regarding the millennium...

If the thousand years are literal, they can be seen as the span of time from David to Christ.  I personally have a problem with this view, because so much happened to Israel during this period (4 of the 5 "desolations" of the land Josephus describes) among other things.  However, this view does seem to fit the thousand year time-frame of the millennium if one approaches it literally.

I, for one, do not.  "Thousand" in the Bible is often used to connote a large but indeterminate number, and so is not to be taken literally.  An example of this is found in the Psalms:

For every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. Psalm 50:10 (ESV)

Clearly, the context of this passage was not to tell the reader that God owned the cattle on only a thousand hills, but that He owned every single head of cattle everywhere.  To read this verse's use of the word "thousand" literally is to suggest that someone else owns the cattle on the other hills that God doesn't.  It's a ridiculous idea and yet when the same literalism is applied to John's use of the word "thousand" in Revelation 20, you get equally absurd justifications from the dispy/futurist crowd.

My view is that John - like Peter - is trying to convey the idea that the period of time from Christ's first advent to His parousia would be a long time period of indeterminate length; something 40 years would certainly fulfill.

I see no need for a literal 1,000 years. That is mainly used by the "antis" to justify a yet future "millennium."

I'm not convinced by the 40 years argument, as that period of grace & longsuffering was not indefinite. Jesus warned this generation while in Hebrews 3 the 40 years is stated explicitly.

I've never considered going back 1000 years before Christ, but there is the possibility that the prophecies of Zechariah & Haggai indicate the beginning of such a period. I need to look at that more closely.

Looking at the spiritual warfare in the NT letters, dare we suggest that Eph. 6 no longer applies? Is the Christian armour only for the first century museum? How much influence do Satan & his hordes of demons have in our world?

I tend to the view that the "millennium" began with resurrection of Christ, & took full effect with the destruction, & is still in effect - but can we see the release of Satan from the abyss in the increasing persecution around the world,  & the rejection of Christ & the Law in once "Christian" countries? 

[raggthyme13]

So Covenanter, being a partial preterist, do you believe in a day when Jesus will physically come, set his feet down upon the earth again? And how do you differentiate between the verses speaking of his ad70 "coming" and his final one? Thanks!

[Covenanter]

So Covenanter, being a partial preterist, do you believe in a day when Jesus will physically come, set his feet down upon the earth again? And how do you differentiate between the verses speaking of his ad70 "coming" and his final one? Thanks!

I read 1 Thes. 4 - 2 Thes. 1 as referring to Jesus' final coming for general resurrection & judgment. In 2 Thes. 2, Paul explains that the ad 70 coming for the temple destruction must come before the final coming.

Should we take Jude & 2 Peter 2 as referring to the ad 70 coming? Specifically & exclusively? Specifically - yes. Exclusively, no.

There are plenty of Korahs & Balaams around in our day - the principles apply, & we can take the way Paul also quoted very specific OT examples as written for OUR learning.
1 Cor. 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

Paul's letters were written to Gentile churches, so I do not think we should read ad 70 into them more than the context requires.

[raggthyme13]

1 Cor. 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

Paul's letters were written to Gentile churches, so I do not think we should read ad 70 into them more than the context requires.

My question would be, if the ends of the age had come upon them, could we say that same thing 2000 years later? I thought that the "age" spoken of here is covenantal.. and we know that happened in the first century, right?

[Stormcrow]

Paul's letters were written to Gentile churches...

As the early churches originally met in synagogues (and later in homes when Jewish persecution drove Jewish converts out of the synagogues), Paul often addresses Jews specifically in his letters, too.  Here's one example of Paul greeting Jewish converts to Christ in Ephesus:

In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace which He lavished on us. In all wisdom and insight He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him  with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. Ephesians 1:7-12 (NASB)

Paul's reference to "we who were the first to hope in Christ" is a clear reference to a Jewish audience.  It's vitally important to understand that Paul is addressing both Jewish and Gentile issues in his letters because improperly understanding Paul's audience leads to all kinds of error.  Predestination (election) is clearly a Jewish doctrine, especially as seen in Revelation (and seen here in Ephesians, too), yet the Bible is equally clear as to whom may receive salvation: whomever calls on the name of the Lord. 

The Jews were God's chosen (predestined or elected people) and Paul often addresses them in his letters.

Just wanted to mention that and remind folks that there is not a single book of the new testament (or old, for that fact) addressed to us.  We can take certain universal truths out of Paul's writings, but he was not thinking of us when he wrote those letters. 

[Covenanter]

Paul's letters were written to Gentile churches...

As the early churches originally met in synagogues (and later in homes when Jewish persecution drove Jewish converts out of the synagogues), Paul often addresses Jews specifically in his letters, too. 

OK Jew & Gentile churches, but while the preaching was initially in the synagogues, the unconverted Jews soon drove out the converts, both Jews & the Gentiles that were attending the synagogues.

The new Christians met in homes, not under Jewish auspices.

Here's one example of Paul greeting Jewish converts to Christ in Ephesus:

In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace which He lavished on us. In all wisdom and insight He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him  with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. Ephesians 1:7-12 (NASB)

Paul's reference to "we who were the first to hope in Christ" is a clear reference to a Jewish audience.  It's vitally important to understand that Paul is addressing both Jewish and Gentile issues in his letters because improperly understanding Paul's audience leads to all kinds of error.  Predestination (election) is clearly a Jewish doctrine, especially as seen in Revelation (and seen here in Ephesians, too), yet the Bible is equally clear as to whom may receive salvation: whomever calls on the name of the Lord. 

The Jews were God's chosen (predestined or elected people) and Paul often addresses them in his letters.

While Israel is spoken of in the OT as God's chosen people, there is no new covenant reason to say that all NT references mean the Jews. The expression In Him also we have obtained an inheritance counts in all the Ephesian believers. You can't insist on "we" meaning Jews, though we who were the first to hope in Christ is a clear reference to a Jewish authorship, not audience.

Just wanted to mention that and remind folks that there is not a single book of the new testament (or old, for that fact) addressed to us.  We can take certain universal truths out of Paul's writings, but he was not thinking of us when he wrote those letters.

I'm not sure how to take that. In 1 Cor. 14 Paul writes: 3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. We can take thatas addressed to all Christians. Jesus in his Olivet prophecy says: 37 And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.

2 Tim. 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

[Stormcrow]

2 Tim. 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God

At the time Paul wrote this, the only "scriptures" in existence were the books of the Old Testament. 

[Stormcrow]

You can't insist on "we" meaning Jews, though we who were the first to hope in Christ is a clear reference to a Jewish authorship, not audience.

Those who were the first to hope in Christ were the Jews.  Paul identifies himself with these Jewish believers by using the pronoun "we."  He is clearly identifying with fellow Jewish believers in this passage.  He addresses Gentiles specifically later in chapter two, which is a common motif in Paul's writings.

[Stormcrow]

While Israel is spoken of in the OT as God's chosen people, there is no new covenant reason to say that all NT references mean the Jews.

I never wrote there was.  But it's clear in many of the letters Paul wrote (as well as the writings of the other apostles), there are issues addressed and appeals made to both groups within the church.  Understanding that Jewish believers were still under the Law while also under grace provides critical background needed to properly understand Paul's letters.

[Stormcrow]

Jesus in his Olivet prophecy says: 37 And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.

And in the context of the Olivet Discourse, this is clearly yet another admonition to those living during that generation.

[raggthyme13]

Jesus in his Olivet prophecy says: 37 And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.

And in the context of the Olivet Discourse, this is clearly yet another admonition to those living during that generation.

that's how I read it as well.

[Covenanter]

1 Cor. 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

Paul's letters were written to Gentile churches, so I do not think we should read ad 70 into them more than the context requires.

My question would be, if the ends of the age had come upon them, could we say that same thing 2000 years later? I thought that the "age" spoken of here is covenantal.. and we know that happened in the first century, right?

The fact that the last days were in 1st C, &  the "end" came on carnal Israel as prophesied does not mean that this new covenant age will run on for over, with Christ reigning over an very rebellious earth.

Will God's patience run out, as it did in the days of Noah, Sodom & Israel? That question is not answered by imposing a Preterist interpretation on the NT.

[raggthyme13]

1 Cor. 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

Paul's letters were written to Gentile churches, so I do not think we should read ad 70 into them more than the context requires.

My question would be, if the ends of the age had come upon them, could we say that same thing 2000 years later? I thought that the "age" spoken of here is covenantal.. and we know that happened in the first century, right?

The fact that the last days were in 1st C, &  the "end" came on carnal Israel as prophesied does not mean that this new covenant age will run on for over, with Christ reigning over an very rebellious earth.

Will God's patience run out, as it did in the days of Noah, Sodom & Israel? That question is not answered by imposing a Preterist interpretation on the NT.

Didn't the LORD say after the flood that he will never again destroy the earth for man's wickedness?

[Stormcrow]

 The LORD smelled the soothing aroma; and the LORD said to Himself, "I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth; and I will never again destroy every living thing, as I have done.  "While the earth remains, Seedtime and harvest, And cold and heat, And summer and winter, And day and night Shall not cease." Genesis 8:21-22 (NASB)

Those looking in the Bible for a universe-ending catastrophe are looking for the wrong thing.

[raggthyme13]

The fact that the last days were in 1st C, &  the "end" came on carnal Israel as prophesied does not mean that this new covenant age will run on for over, with Christ reigning over an very rebellious earth.

Does Christ reign over a rebellious earth, or are these rebels the ones Revelation says are "without".. the dogs, murderers, idolators. Outside the eternal kingdom which Christ reigns over on this earth, even at this present time?

[Covenanter]

I've looked at all the recent points, I will at first seek to establish a general reply.

My arguments with disps have been over the interpretation of Scripture - they read & interpret Scripture through a disp hermeneutic which overrides the plain meaning of the Scripture, while claiming to be "literal." That is, they consider OT prophecy relating to Israel to be primary, while ignoring the prophetic fulfilment recorded in the NT. They do not allow the NT to interpret the OT, nor do they accept NT fulfilment as true fulfilment of the OT.

e.g. The Olivet prophecy is primarily future "end times" as is Revelation, not ad 70.

The hermeneutic that I believe to be Biblical is Covenant Theology. I do not consider either Preterism or Dispensationalism to be valid interpretational hermeneutics. A lot of understanding & wisdom is needed before we interpret.

My difficulty with full Preterism is that it sees prophecy in terms of ad 70, & therefore imposes that understanding on ALL the Scriptures that refer to the coming of Jesus for resurrection & judgement.

To be continued....

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

1 Cor. 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

Paul's letters were written to Gentile churches, so I do not think we should read ad 70 into them more than the context requires.

My question would be, if the ends of the age had come upon them, could we say that same thing 2000 years later? I thought that the "age" spoken of here is covenantal.. and we know that happened in the first century, right?

The fact that the last days were in 1st C, &  the "end" came on carnal Israel as prophesied does not mean that this new covenant age will run on for over, with Christ reigning over an very rebellious earth.

Will God's patience run out, as it did in the days of Noah, Sodom & Israel? That question is not answered by imposing a Preterist interpretation on the NT.

Jewish thought has been influenced since forever by the concept of "ages" (or eons or "weeks" or whatever you want to call them).  Daniel and Revelation have them.  The pseudepigrapha is full of these books - the book of Jubilees is the most well-known example of this kind of literature.  1Enoch contains a very interesting one.

That said.. the "last days" and "end" in the gospels refer only to the end of one of these ages, or "weeks," if you prefer.

Actually, it seems pretty clear to me that the "Tribulation" with it's seven years, is meant to be this kind of Jewish "week."  An age of persecution for the Jewish nation.

After that, we have Revelation with its seven bowls/trumps/seals/judgments.  That seems to me to figure another "week" in the reckoning.  It seems to be an age of God's judgments on the wicked.

There's a lot of say about these weeks, or ages, but I don't want to hijack this thread with it, so I guess I'll leave it with this...

The book of Enoch postulates 10 ages, with weeks 8 and 9 being ages of tribulation and judgment.  That matches the New Testament's tribulation and judgment weeks very closely.  Enoch's 10th week is a never-ending rule of God.

Jarrod

[Lehigh]

The fact that the last days were in 1st C, &  the "end" came on carnal Israel as prophesied does not mean that this new covenant age will run on for over, with Christ reigning over an very rebellious earth.

Does Christ reign over a rebellious earth, or are these rebels the ones Revelation says are "without".. the dogs, murderers, idolators. Outside the eternal kingdom which Christ reigns over on this earth, even at this present time?

The "or" sounds correct. They are outside of the kingdom.  Those who put their trust in Christ are in "the kingdom" and are like "well-watered gardens" (Psa.1) (Rev22)

However, God is in control of everything on earth.  Rebels or not.

[Stormcrow]

My difficulty with full Preterism is that it sees prophecy in terms of ad 70, & therefore imposes that understanding on ALL the Scriptures that refer to the coming of Jesus for resurrection & judgement.

If you haven't already, check out this link.  It explains why full preterism sees resurrection and judgment coinciding with 70 AD and the end of the Mosaic Age:

http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/preterist-forum/the-end-of-one-age-and-the-beginning-of-another/

[Covenanter]

My difficulty with full Preterism is that it sees prophecy in terms of ad 70, & therefore imposes that understanding on ALL the Scriptures that refer to the coming of Jesus for resurrection & judgement.

If you haven't already, check out this link.  It explains why full preterism sees resurrection and judgment coinciding with 70 AD and the end of the Mosaic Age:

http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/preterist-forum/the-end-of-one-age-and-the-beginning-of-another/

I presume your forum name is derived from the bird we know as the mistlethrush:

The male sings its loud melodious song from a tree, rooftop or other elevated perch, often during bad weather or at night, and starting relatively early in the spring — hence the Mistle Thrush's old name of "Stormcock".

I've looked at the link it confirms the Preterist position, but does it confirm full Preterism?

My concern is similar to the futurist position - they focus on Israel & all the bizarre events of the PTR, etc, rather than on Christ. We must not lose sight of Christ by the use of a Preterist hermeneutic. Scripture must stand as our sole authority.