|
|
Post by Michael J Loomis on Jun 7, 2009 20:58:09 GMT -5
Check out the new site. WWW.PRETERISTCHURCH.COMI was kind of surprised that this domain name wasn't taken. 8) Anyhow...I just thought it would be a hoot to put together a preterist church directory. So...If you know of any preterist fellowships out there that want to be in a directory, let me know. This was one of the first things I searched for when I came to preterism. Mike P.S. Pretty soon we will have a preterist fellowship here in SoCal. I really need to get off my duff and get it started. 8) |
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jun 8, 2009 7:29:49 GMT -5
Hi Mike - way to go. I don't know of any in Nebraska except in Omaha, which is 250 miles from me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael J Loomis on Jun 9, 2009 15:25:28 GMT -5
Thanks Allyn, Things are definately moving forward. I just need to remember to stay away from the forums and keep moving things in a positive direction. I'm pretty much done voluntarily trying to defend my position.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jun 9, 2009 17:45:24 GMT -5
I love this idea, Mike. And I love the fact that you have decided to stop defending against the rocks thrown by others who have only destruction in mind. Lets just study, teach and spread the Good News of Jesus Christ.
When things settle down for me after this week I will follow your lead.
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jun 10, 2009 19:19:54 GMT -5
What I'm about to say goes against even my own strong desire for fellowship with like-minded believers. But, you know, we'll never find anyone whose beliefs perfectly match our own. It seems there will always be an area of disagreement. Instead of dividing the body of Christ even more by creating yet another pocket of hyphenated Christians (e.g., Preterist-Christian), someone needs to come up with an idea to UNITE us as a FAMILY. No, I don't have the answer. I just felt the need to rant a bit. And pray.  Bev |
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jun 10, 2009 20:15:46 GMT -5
I certainly can't find a reason to disagree with you, Bev. Its a good thought to consider and its probably biblical as well. Boy, am I wishy washy or what?
The fact is I get the greatest satisfaction out of the church of my choice when I am just living for Christ and being a servant with a servant attitude. Works for me..
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael J Loomis on Jun 11, 2009 0:19:51 GMT -5
I agree with you 100% Bev...We need to do something ecumenical...Even though that word leaves a bad taste in everyones mouth. I seriously would like to move this thing forward in an ECUMENICAL fashion...But that word just leaves such an awful taste in everyones mouth. Any suggestions??? www.preteristchurch.com |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jun 11, 2009 15:11:50 GMT -5
I guess we can thank evangelical Christianity for giving the word "ecumenical" such a bad flavor. I got drawn into that mindset, as well, until my beliefs started shifting beyond the boundaries of orthodoxy. That forced me to realize that we're all on a journey to learn the truth of the scriptures. A different, sincerely derived, understanding is not rebellion against God, but is rather the result of a human mind seeking for God.
I sense that I could ramble on about this, but I'd best stop while it's short!
Bev
|
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Jun 11, 2009 15:49:23 GMT -5
What I'm about to say goes against even my own strong desire for fellowship with like-minded believers. But, you know, we'll never find anyone whose beliefs perfectly match our own. It seems there will always be an area of disagreement. Instead of dividing the body of Christ even more by creating yet another pocket of hyphenated Christians (e.g., Preterist-Christian), someone needs to come up with an idea to UNITE us as a FAMILY. No, I don't have the answer. I just felt the need to rant a bit. And pray. Bev I am quite willing and desirous to unite with other Christians. Unfortunately, once they understand what it is I believe regarding eschatology and its definition, they do not wish to unite with me. Bats, clubs, and other objects of destruction become their focus... We are separated from; we are not the separators. And because no one wants to fellowship with us (as preterists), we put out the watchword to try to organize fellowship. I don't think anyone wants Christian fellowship more than preterists do...but we are denied at every turn - even called unchristian by those who profess to be saved... Anybody passing through Oshawa, Ontario is quite welcome to stop on by and visit! |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jun 11, 2009 16:19:18 GMT -5
I am quite willing and desirous to unite with other Christians. Unfortunately, once they understand what it is I believe regarding eschatology and its definition, they do not wish to unite with me. Bats, clubs, and other objects of destruction become their focus... We are separated from; we are not the separators. And because no one wants to fellowship with us (as preterists), we put out the watchword to try to organize fellowship. I don't think anyone wants Christian fellowship more than preterists do...but we are denied at every turn - even called unchristian by those who profess to be saved... Exactly. That is the tragedy of which I speak. The lines of fellowship have been drawn around human ego and pride. By asserting themselves to be right and everyone else wrong, other godly, Christ-following believers are labeled and treated as enemies. I wish I knew how to fix it. Fear seems to be behind the resistance to fellowship and accept as brethren those who believe differently. Maybe if we can define the basis of the fear, we can know how to approach it. |
|
|
|
Post by stephenpatrick on Jun 11, 2009 18:32:30 GMT -5
I am quite willing and desirous to unite with other Christians. Unfortunately, once they understand what it is I believe regarding eschatology and its definition, they do not wish to unite with me. Bats, clubs, and other objects of destruction become their focus... We are separated from; we are not the separators. And because no one wants to fellowship with us (as preterists), we put out the watchword to try to organize fellowship. I don't think anyone wants Christian fellowship more than preterists do...but we are denied at every turn - even called unchristian by those who profess to be saved... Exactly. That is the tragedy of which I speak. The lines of fellowship have been drawn around human ego and pride. By asserting themselves to be right and everyone else wrong, other godly, Christ-following believers are labeled and treated as enemies. I wish I knew how to fix it. Fear seems to be behind the resistance to fellowship and accept as brethren those who believe differently. Maybe if we can define the basis of the fear, we can know how to approach it.Hi Bev, I guess I'd like to try and define the fear. The inability to deal with an issue or topic which utterly destroys ones worldview is scary, but its more ignorance than anything else. Another term is cognitive dissonance. The brain can't handle the information it is given, so it resorts to anger and revulsion. Determined to not have that happen again, the person will never attempt to learn more about the "other side". I know, I was there once. Dispensationalism is extremly toxic to growing mentally and spiritually. Almost like trying to penetrate someone who has been brainwashed. I've tried to explain the "time texts" in the NT to dispy's and 99% of the time it doesn't last more than 1-2 minutes. When "soon" really means soon, their theological viewpoint crashes hard. Its no wonder they're fearful. Steve |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jun 12, 2009 19:44:34 GMT -5
Thanks, Steve. Good thoughts there.
I think one of the problems, if not the biggest problem, preventing the utopia of Christian unity I'd like to see, is that all of us desire to explain and convince others of our views. The preterists want to show the dispies why preterism is right and dispensationalism is wrong; and vice-versa. That, of course, applies to other areas of disagreement, such as OSAS vs. conditional salvation, trinitarian vs. non-trinitarian, and other opposing views on things like baptism, tongues, healing, etc.
Maybe unity isn't feasible after all. For example, how can someone who believes that tongues ceased ever be comfortable at a church gathering where tongues are spoken? And how long can a non-trinitarian sit and listen to a sermon about how Jesus is God?
So maybe denominations are necessary. Maybe a preterist church IS necessary. A unity in assembly is not likely to happen, but a change in attitude toward others should certainly be possible.
Steve, you made a strong point regarding preterism vs. dispensationalism - they are entirely different world views! Maybe we need to not try to convince one another of an opposing view, except in the case where genuine curiosity and desire to learn is expressed.
I'm babbling and I know it. Right now I don't even feel adequate to discuss the topic anymore!
|
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Jun 13, 2009 7:00:55 GMT -5
It is my personal experience that the VAST majority of dispensationalists are NOT seekers of truth; they are indoctrinated with theological tradition. The VAST majority want nothing else.
When discussing preterism, I have found the VAST majority (of dispensationalists and others) are way to immature to communicate in a reasonable manner. We have all experienced CARM (and other sites). Some preterists, like myself, have demonstrated like-minded immaturity and have had to leave to get a breath of fresh air. There is no point casting our pearls of wisdom before those who have no desire to hear them. Their ears have been stopped. This was the last thing they did before killing Stephen (Acts 7:57)
Amos 3:3, Proverbs 22:24
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jun 13, 2009 8:14:46 GMT -5
The apostle Paul said, in part, concerning the Jews - "how shall they hear without a preacher?". This is true in all generations, I believe. But yet their must be a hearer to go along with that. If there is preaching and there is no one to listen then our preaching takes no effect. We are experiencing this all over the net, but its not as hopeless as it seems. I came to where I am because of the calm but direct teaching of someone else. Those who I listened to did not know they were having an impact on me.
I think we as preterists/biblists are evolving in our approach as to how we demonstrate the Word of God and all things fulfilled. We will always run into those like the RodEs and PaulTs. THey may be for a purpose, whether ours or theirs but still for a purpose.
What I have to do is watch out for my own soul that it is not hindered by those who wish to kill me. Not literally kill me but to cause me to be disheartened and become more like them. Doesn't every church and every pastor face this risk and this challenge?
I am preparing myself to go the direction Christ wants me to go. I am being bombarded on every side but I am determined to move in only His direction. There are those here among us that I wish to do this with. I think in time we will.
|
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Jun 13, 2009 15:55:56 GMT -5
It has been said that a mark of a cult is its focus on obscure portions of scripture to the exclusion of more balanced doctrines - and in particular - eschatology. Our churches are supposed to be centered on the gospel of Christ - yet eschatological views affect how the gospel is preached even among Evangelicals.
Personally, I do not think full preterism is the place to stop our search for truth and camp there. We are not to be hyphenated Christians, but followers of Christ. I do however think Preterism has been His leading, but I do not expect that to be the end all of my search for the knowledge of Him and the understanding of the fullness of His glory.
That pesky little passage in Rev 20 still nags me about a time future to the events of 70AD, when the saints would face Satan and his Gog/ Magog bands. I don't see how full preterists can put that period at 70AD when the saints were already overcomers of the great trib and mark of the beast which marked the beginning of the 1,000 yrs - not the end.
If a fire is coming, we ought to be able to give a proper warning to the churches.
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jun 13, 2009 16:21:08 GMT -5
Robin, what exactly is that pesky little passage in Revelation 20? I think I know what it is (the same one that gnaws at my friend Paul - who hasn't posted here in a long time). But I'd like to know the exact verses again so that I can ponder it a bit.
Bev
|
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Jun 13, 2009 16:46:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jun 13, 2009 22:57:42 GMT -5
Thanks for the pointer. I've subscribed to the thread. I think I'm in agreement with Dale on this.
Bev
|
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Jun 14, 2009 14:52:14 GMT -5
Well, Bev maybe you can explain then how if the rest of the dead rise in 70AD - then where does that place the first resurrection?
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jun 14, 2009 18:38:09 GMT -5
Hi Robin, From your study do you believe the 1st resurrection has taken place and if so is the 1000 years over or how do you reconcile the one if Satan has not yet been released, assuming that the 1st resurrection is over? Now if you get that compound sentence would you explain it to me?  |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jun 15, 2009 23:09:28 GMT -5
Well, Bev maybe you can explain then how if the rest of the dead rise in 70AD - then where does that place the first resurrection? I have to admit that I'm not that intimately studied with all this. I read things and they either make sense or they don't. I agree with what makes sense until something comes along that makes better sense. |
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Jun 16, 2009 10:52:31 GMT -5
Hi Robin, From your study do you believe the 1st resurrection has taken place and if so is the 1000 years over or how do you reconcile the one if Satan has not yet been released, assuming that the 1st resurrection is over? Now if you get that compound sentence would you explain it to me? It has only been a few days that I have been pondering how the full preterist looks at the 1,000 years and I think I finally get it - and agree! The key is in Daniel's prophecies and the dominion given to Christ that is extended to the saints - forever. I came across an article that spoke of the OT belief that the millennial period was in fact the period of the transition between the old kingdom and the new. So it makes sense to me that the demise of the devil - though perhaps not his demons, was a necessary component for how the saints could have the dominion without his interference. Christ announced to His disciples that ALL power in heaven and earth had been given to Him. That means He rules in the kingdom of men and of angels. Satan cannot usurp His rule, nor the authority we have in Christ. It helps to stick with those clear passages to help understand these more obscure ones! The first resurrection concerned the resurrection of Christ and the firstfruits to follow. The rest of the dead would have to be the OT saints in 70 AD. Which according to Daniel would not take place until the trib. They were the ones spoken of in the Mat 25:31 judgment - who did not know that their service had been to Christ. The rest of the dead were who faced the judgment and 2nd death. We who are living and believing in Christ however never die as they did, and so our part is in the first resurrection. Therefore our hope is like Stephen's that when the Lord comes for us at death it is to take us to be where He is. I have decided that so called Israel is just another nation in the earth and as such has no prophetic significance now that Christ is ruling in the kingdoms of men. She may however serve to help the churches recover themselves from the delusion the dispies have brought in. If Israel should incite her enemies to war, the Lord will glorify His name which ought to help His people recover themselves and realize once and for all that we are the children of the kingdom of God and no other. And the Lord needn't return physically to the earth to accomplish that either. Nations rise and nations fall as the Lord wills, but the kingdom of God is forever! Addendum: It also helps when looking at 2,000 years of Church history to see how the Lord has helped the churches to recover their gospel hope in Christ when men sought to take the kingdom for themselves. Ought we not expect Him to continue to do this? Certainly the times we are in show that men are relentless in their pursuit of religion to take the glory for themselves. But the Lord exposes them time and time again, and our hope in the gospel of Christ prevails. Even when the creedalists try to add their spin! |
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jun 16, 2009 12:20:30 GMT -5
Thank you for your response, Robin. I committed myself to reading 2 times daily for the month Rev. chapter 17-20 over and over again. The Spirit of God is faithful and my eyes are opening to the meaning within those chapters. It is clearer and clearer to me and I hope to put my findings to words soon. At any rate I am happy to read your view.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Kelly on Jun 18, 2009 9:10:26 GMT -5
Hello Robin,
But how can they rule with Christ for 1000 years when they're not killed until the 1000 years have almost ended? Does not the wording of Rev 20:4 seem to suggest a one off event, rather than an unfolding event that spans across the 1000 years? And if it does span across the 1000 years would not a better wording be "they came to life and ruled as kings with Christ during the 1000 years...as opposed to for a 1000 years?
I'm a full preterist myself, but really can't make head nor tail of Rev 20. Couldn't as a futurist. Can't as preterist. Some things never change...lol :-(
Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael J Loomis on Jun 19, 2009 1:59:25 GMT -5
Robin has hit it right on the nose in my opinion. The thousand began with the binding of Satan and ended with the destruction of the enemies of God's people.
Verse 1 - He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years
Verse 9 - They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the CAMP OF THE SAINTS and the BELOVED CITY. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them.
For me anyhow the details define the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Jun 19, 2009 19:38:16 GMT -5
One key here is the word Telos [5055] which appears 3 times and is translated fulfilled, finished, and expired. Its tense is aortist subjunctive passive which casts some doubt as to when something is to be done which is not in the temporal realm at all. 'Whenever it should be finished' I think would be an accurate rendering.
Also the word for thousand Chilioi [5505] is plural in each instance and is in the accusative each time it is used except in v5 where it is nominative. I couldn't find much on what the accusative case means for a cardinal number, but in looking at Telos - Rev 11:7, it appears in the accusative and it also states 'when they shall have finished their testimony' - allowing the time for the completion of something which is definitely reaching its intended goal yet not stating exactly when.
I believe the 1,000's of years is the idiom used for the Messianic period the Jews expected which was to come before the fullness of that new kingdom was reached. The gathering into the kingdom is however not in the earthly realm but in the heavenly - hence no accurate measure of earthly time is given - as it is in the Father's perogative to say when the goal is reached and commence with the final things which is the sending of wrath for the wicked and salvation for the saints.
We know the first resurrection began with Christ, and this gathering of the firstfruits of the last generation of Israel was what the delay was about until all the elect had been reached and sealed. I don't think the elect remnant was concerned with Gentiles as to their number, but to the Jews. Afterall, it was their system that was about to end. And it is possible that some of those lost sons of Israel were Gentiles by then, from the 10 tribes scattered in Isaiah's day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael J Loomis on Jun 19, 2009 20:08:09 GMT -5
 Yes and Amen...  One key here is the word Telos [5055] which appears 3 times and is translated fulfilled, finished, and expired. Its tense is aortist subjunctive passive which casts some doubt as to when something is to be done which is not in the temporal realm at all. 'Whenever it should be finished' I think would be an accurate rendering. Also the word for thousand Chilioi [5505] is plural in each instance and is in the accusative each time it is used except in v5 where it is nominative. I couldn't find much on what the accusative case means for a cardinal number, but in looking at Telos - Rev 11:7, it appears in the accusative and it also states 'when they shall have finished their testimony' - allowing the time for the completion of something which is definitely reaching its intended goal yet not stating exactly when. I believe the 1,000's of years is the idiom used for the Messianic period the Jews expected which was to come before the fullness of that new kingdom was reached. The gathering into the kingdom is however not in the earthly realm but in the heavenly - hence no accurate measure of earthly time is given - as it is in the Father's perogative to say when the goal is reached and commence with the final things which is the sending of wrath for the wicked and salvation for the saints. We know the first resurrection began with Christ, and this gathering of the firstfruits of the last generation of Israel was what the delay was about until all the elect had been reached and sealed. I don't think the elect remnant was concerned with Gentiles as to their number, but to the Jews. Afterall, it was their system that was about to end. And it is possible that some of those lost sons of Israel were Gentiles by then, from the 10 tribes scattered in Isaiah's day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jun 19, 2009 20:12:52 GMT -5
One key here is the word Telos [5055] which appears 3 times and is translated fulfilled, finished, and expired. Its tense is aortist subjunctive passive which casts some doubt as to when something is to be done which is not in the temporal realm at all. 'Whenever it should be finished' I think would be an accurate rendering. Also the word for thousand Chilioi [5505] is plural in each instance and is in the accusative each time it is used except in v5 where it is nominative. I couldn't find much on what the accusative case means for a cardinal number, but in looking at Telos - Rev 11:7, it appears in the accusative and it also states 'when they shall have finished their testimony' - allowing the time for the completion of something which is definitely reaching its intended goal yet not stating exactly when. I believe the 1,000's of years is the idiom used for the Messianic period the Jews expected which was to come before the fullness of that new kingdom was reached. The gathering into the kingdom is however not in the earthly realm but in the heavenly - hence no accurate measure of earthly time is given - as it is in the Father's perogative to say when the goal is reached and commence with the final things which is the sending of wrath for the wicked and salvation for the saints. We know the first resurrection began with Christ, and this gathering of the firstfruits of the last generation of Israel was what the delay was about until all the elect had been reached and sealed. I don't think the elect remnant was concerned with Gentiles as to their number, but to the Jews. Afterall, it was their system that was about to end. And it is possible that some of those lost sons of Israel were Gentiles by then, from the 10 tribes scattered in Isaiah's day. Thanks so much for that information, Robin. I have maintained that this all takes place in the unseen world and is seen from the heavenly perspective. Time means nothing there and what we experience on earth is only a string of what is actual from the heavenly perspective. For example the struggle between good and evil as eluded to by the angel who was detained in persia during Daniels vision is a good example of what must be going on in the places not normally seen by mortal man. The chariots of fire allowed to be seen is another example. My point is, and I have found this to be true in my re-reading of Rev. 17-20, is that all is not what it seems to us from our own vantage point but rather is only language used in order to give us a rare glimpse of what we cannot otherwise see. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael J Loomis on Jun 19, 2009 22:27:33 GMT -5
Exactly...The reality is in the heavens and eternity. The reality is a ship on the water and what we see here on Earth is simply the shadow on the sea floor. It is really unfortunate when people worship the shadow thinking it is the reality. If you want to see a cloud you raise your eyes up into the heavens not to the ground where the shadow is cast. 8) Mike One key here is the word Telos [5055] which appears 3 times and is translated fulfilled, finished, and expired. Its tense is aortist subjunctive passive which casts some doubt as to when something is to be done which is not in the temporal realm at all. 'Whenever it should be finished' I think would be an accurate rendering. Also the word for thousand Chilioi [5505] is plural in each instance and is in the accusative each time it is used except in v5 where it is nominative. I couldn't find much on what the accusative case means for a cardinal number, but in looking at Telos - Rev 11:7, it appears in the accusative and it also states 'when they shall have finished their testimony' - allowing the time for the completion of something which is definitely reaching its intended goal yet not stating exactly when. I believe the 1,000's of years is the idiom used for the Messianic period the Jews expected which was to come before the fullness of that new kingdom was reached. The gathering into the kingdom is however not in the earthly realm but in the heavenly - hence no accurate measure of earthly time is given - as it is in the Father's perogative to say when the goal is reached and commence with the final things which is the sending of wrath for the wicked and salvation for the saints. We know the first resurrection began with Christ, and this gathering of the firstfruits of the last generation of Israel was what the delay was about until all the elect had been reached and sealed. I don't think the elect remnant was concerned with Gentiles as to their number, but to the Jews. Afterall, it was their system that was about to end. And it is possible that some of those lost sons of Israel were Gentiles by then, from the 10 tribes scattered in Isaiah's day. Thanks so much for that information, Robin. I have maintained that this all takes place in the unseen world and is seen from the heavenly perspective. Time means nothing there and what we experience on earth is only a string of what is actual from the heavenly perspective. For example the struggle between good and evil as eluded to by the angel who was detained in persia during Daniels vision is a good example of what must be going on in the places not normally seen by mortal man. The chariots of fire allowed to be seen is another example. My point is, and I have found this to be true in my re-reading of Rev. 17-20, is that all is not what it seems to us from our own vantage point but rather is only language used in order to give us a rare glimpse of what we cannot otherwise see. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jun 20, 2009 16:35:51 GMT -5
Exactly...The reality is in the heavens and eternity. The reality is a ship on the water and what we see here on Earth is simply the shadow on the sea floor. It is really unfortunate when people worship the shadow thinking it is the reality. If you want to see a cloud you raise your eyes up into the heavens not to the ground where the shadow is cast. 8) Mike Wow, Mike, that's downright poetic!  Bev |
|
