Preterism

[JM]

(On Matthew 24:15 (http://www.preteristarchive.addr.com/StudyArchive/pc_matthew_24-15.html))
"...This same Pilate, at that time Roman Procurator, sent from Caesarea, the seaport of that country on the Mediterranean Sea, a legion of Roman soldiers and had them secretly introduced into the city and sheltered in the tower of Antonio overlooking the Temple, and these soldiers brought with them their ensigns. The Roman sign was a straight staff, capped with a metallic eagle, and right under the eagle was a graven image of Caesar. Caesar claimed to be divine. Caesar exacted divine worship, and every evening when those standards were placed, the Roman legion got down and worshipped the image of Caesar thereof, and every morning at the roll call a part of the parade was for the whole legion to prostrate themselves before that graven image and worship it. The Jews were so horrified when they saw that image and the consequent worship, they went to Pilate, who was at that time living in Caesarea, and prostrated themselves before him and said, 'Kill us, if you will, but take that abomination of desolation out of our Holy City and from the neighborhood of our holy temple.' While that was an abomination, Jerusalem was not encompassed with armies. 'When ye shall see the abomination which makes desolation spoken of by Daniel, the prophet, set up where it ought not to be, and see Jerusalem compassed with armies,' that is the sign of the destruction of Jerusalem. The greatest desolation ever wrought in the world on a people, was made under that standard and by the Roman power. Therefore, it was the abomination that maketh desolate." (An Introduction of the English Bible, p. 263-264) BH Carroll

How popular is preterism with my fellow baptists?

[novcncy]

Not popular with THIS Baptist. There are some who find it feasible, however.

[MrJim]

I looked into it some years ago. I think there was a teacher named Bray that I got on his mailing list. It is an interesting position but I've forgotten most of it. Do remember that it's sort of like amil in the belief that everything (or most?) came to pass in the apostles lifetime or something like that.

[Joykins]

I find it fairly convincing but I'm not technically Baptist.

I think a lot of eschatological prophecies may be layered (ie. some of it is quite convincingly about what happened in during the apostle's liftime, most are cyclical, i.e. they refer to many tribulations and persecutions throughout history, some of them like the 2nd coming are yet to come, and some seem to refer back to the birth of Christ, some seem allegorical to the general struggle between good and evil).

[arunma]

I suppose Preterism has some merit, provided it is understood that chapters 19-22 of the Revelation have not come to pass yet. I personally believe that certain Biblical prophecies were partially fulfilled in the invasion of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple. But then again, we know that Old Testament prophecies often have a short term partial fulfillment, and a complete, long term fulfillment. I see no reason not to apply the same logic to New Testament prophecy. That said, the man of lawlessness has not been revealed, and we know that the Holy Spirit has not been removed from the world (because as Paul said, he is currently restraining human evil). So I still think that there will be a tribulation at some future date.

Just pure speculation here, but I don't think we should expect to see that Day any time soon. Seeing as how Christians practice our religion with virtually no persecution in the western world (but admittedly, quite a bit in the East), I don't see a worldwide tribulation as a possibility in the near future.

[Andyman_1970]

I too find it fairly convincing (I am technically a Baptist), however I would characterize myself as a partial preterist understanding as Arunma said Rev 19-22 have not happened, etc.

[FreeinChrist]

How popular is preterism with my fellow baptists?

I don't find it convincing at all.

[JPPT1974]

Not popular with THIS Baptist. There are some who find it feasible, however.

Neither with me. But hey you will find opinions vary and differ you know.

[AvgJoe]

I'm leaning towards partial-preterism too, and have thoughts similar to Joykins, but still have "probably" years of studying to do.

[FreeinChrist]

I suppose Preterism has some merit, provided it is understood that chapters 19-22 of the Revelation have not come to pass yet. I personally believe that certain Biblical prophecies were partially fulfilled in the invasion of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple. But then again, we know that Old Testament prophecies often have a short term partial fulfillment, and a complete, long term fulfillment. I see no reason not to apply the same logic to New Testament prophecy. That said, the man of lawlessness has not been revealed, and we know that the Holy Spirit has not been removed from the world (because as Paul said, he is currently restraining human evil). So I still think that there will be a tribulation at some future date.

Just pure speculation here, but I don't think we should expect to see that Day any time soon. Seeing as how Christians practice our religion with virtually no persecution in the western world (but admittedly, quite a bit in the East), I don't see a worldwide tribulation as a possibility in the near future.

The problem with seeing Revelation as partilly fulfilled by the events of 70 AD is that it wasn't written until 95-96 AD, when John was exiled to Patmos by Domitan. The witness of the Early church is that is when it was written - until the Syriac in 600 Ad which suggests before 67 AD. And there is the writings of a Roman historican that when Domitan died, the exiles of Patmos were released, which matches the earliest statment as to the date of its writing by Irenaeus.

So I don't find preterism convincing.

[AvgJoe]

The problem with seeing Revelation as partilly fulfilled by the events of 70 AD is that it wasn't written until 95-96 AD, when John was exiled to Patmos by Domitan. The witness of the Early church is that is when it was written - until the Syriac in 600 Ad which suggests before 67 AD. And there is the writings of a Roman historican that when Domitan died, the exiles of Patmos were released, which matches the earliest statment as to the date of its writing by Irenaeus.

So I don't find preterism convincing.

After first becoming interested in preterism, the date Revlation was written my first point of investigation. Quite simply, if it was written when most sources say it was, 95AD, then preterism hasn't a leg to stand on. The future cannot be predicted 25 years after the fact.

Amongst many sources, I found the following ebook, Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation. It presents a compelling arguement, of both internal and external evidence, for the early date of the writing of Revelation.

http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/2206_47e.htm - click on "Download PDF File" - Its a free download.

God bless!

[Andyman_1970]

I guess I don't understand how John writing 25 years after the fact (of the fall of Jerusalem) negates preterism, or at least partial preterism - remember John is a Jew and Jews used symbols, images, metaphors, pictures to describe events, they also wrote in a way that could have multiple meanings (4 according to most rabbi's). I guess I don't understand the assumption that John was predicting the future and not retelling events that already happened..........

[novcncy]

I'm taking a course in the Minor Prophets right now, and it is truly amazing how many layers there are to their prophecies. We've only covered Obadiah so far, and talk about an opening of the eyes. I never knew that little tiny book had prophecies that have yet to be fulfilled, which fall right into line with the rest of the Bible (of course!!) while at the same time being a mostly fulfilled prophecy. But if we take THAT approach to prophecy, as a whole field, and not simply eschatology, then of couse some of it is fulfilled, and some is yet to be fulfilled.

[AvgJoe]

I guess I don't understand how John writing 25 years after the fact (of the fall of Jerusalem) negates preterism, or at least partial preterism - remember John is a Jew and Jews used symbols, images, metaphors, pictures to describe events, they also wrote in a way that could have multiple meanings (4 according to most rabbi's). I guess I don't understand the assumption that John was predicting the future and not retelling events that already happened..........

The first three verses of Revelation state that it is prophecy, "things which must shortly come to pass."

Revelation 1:1-3

These, as well as, a few other verses negate the possibility that Revelation is simply a retelling of past events.

God bless!

[Andyman_1970]

Interesting..............

[daveleau]

Closed for staff review for rule 6.6.