…you enjoy eschatological wit. My brother-in-law (Josh) and I have had occasion to produce a couple of zingers lately. I would like to present them as a litmus test for determining whether you are a preterist geek.
1) One of the first questions asked by incredulous Christians coming into contact with preterism for the first time is inevitably, “So if all that’s fulfilled, what is there left to happen in the future?” Today, when facing that question, I countered (jovially), “Preterism is the only eschatology with a future: we’re the ones that don’t have to look forward to getting defeated and looking to Jesus for an escape plan. We live in victory.” I was right proud of my extemporaneous outburst, and particularly because of the positive reaction I got. It actually brought a smile to the people (futurists) I was talking to - I think they saw the hope of a fulfilled eschatology for the first time.
2) This one’s pretty funny. Josh and I were pestering Al the futurist about when he was going to have kids. He said, “Not yet! Give me one year. Fifty-two weeks.” Josh shot back, “Why don’t you just make it 70 weeks? With an indeterminable gap before the last week?” 
Email this post to a friend
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Loading ...
12 responses so far ↓
1 Leah // Sep 5, 2007 at 1:45 am
But that last week could happen at any time…
2 Steve // Sep 5, 2007 at 2:21 am
Too true! And sure enough, only a few months later (I originally posted this quite a while back), Al found at that they were expecting. His wife’s due a couple weeks after ours!
3 Scott // Sep 24, 2007 at 8:32 am
I am a former Full Preterist. I certainly loved the post.
http://www.shadowsofthecross.com/
4 preterist heresy // Nov 29, 2007 at 1:49 pm
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/
5 preterist heresy // Dec 11, 2007 at 5:30 pm
It is quite funny how Preterist think the victory is simply a past event. For those who have not yet taken up their cross, or for those who are still baring their cross, the game is not over, nor has victory been one. Paul compared his his life to running a race, and where was his finish line. Was it in 70AD or at Calvary (when he too in the likeness of Jesus, died for his faith. He saw Christ’s victory through the cross, but by no means did he think he had yet obtained it.
“Preterism is the only eschatology with a future: we’re the ones that don’t have to look forward to getting defeated and looking to Jesus for an escape plan. We live in victory.”
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/
6 Steve // Dec 11, 2007 at 8:04 pm
I don’t want to feed the troll. But I think people will get a kick out of your website (which quotes a lot of good preterist material and doesn’t come close to refuting it), so I’m not going to delete your comment, and consequently I need to respond to clarify my position for anyone reading this.
The futurist position I’m critiquing says that Jesus accomplished a wonderful work, but we’ve just been living in a half-way house for two millennia. A 2,000 year parenthetical stage given all the time statements (which you do not address) strains credulity.
Do we live more victoriously than Paul, who died before the Parousia? Well, manifestly, we live at least as victorious as he did. It was Paul who said that “we” (he and his audience) were “more than conquerors”, even in the face of Jewish persecution. That’s the victorious life. First century Christians weren’t burying their talent, waiting for the world to go to pot so that Jesus could come back and clean up the mess they left Him. That’s not living as “more than conquerors”, no matter how you slice it, and that was the point of my quip in the above post.
But because preterists realize that our mandate for dominion from Genesis 1:28 has been restored, it is we who are walking in the victory Christ won for us, not the headline eschatology type.
7 preteristheresy // Dec 14, 2007 at 5:53 pm
I am sure glad someone is getting a kick out of the site. It is acually amazing how many errors are running rampant within Preterist circles becuase they uphold the dispensational line in 70ad where things end and things begin (and by doing so, they place ALL MEN in the new). Saying ALL men are in the Age to Come, or New Heavens and Earth is nothing more than Universalism. Were the ungodly found worthy to obtain that age? Where they found worthy to survive the Present heavens and earth judgment which was RESERVED for judgment of ungodly men. I guess, one only needed to survive 70ad to enter the new Heavens and earth “where only righteousness dwells” 2 Pet 3:13.
Preterists continue to show that they see the bible as “mere past events” and make the bible irrevelant to those who are continuing to find that Christ is fulfilling his promises within you and me, just like he did for Paul in his own day. Making the bible a historical book, rather than a book leading to new life in Christ, is really bad theology. There are many countless errors with adding 70ad to the bible, despite the fact that not one verse claims the Parousia, resurection, Age to Come, or the New Heavens and earth, appeared or came PAST TENSE, in 70ad. While some make excuses for why this is, it can only mean that the fulfillment is not temporal or earthly by any means.
I have been a Preterist quite a few years have heard pretty much every arguement that they have made. But their are many issues and implications that have not been addressed and show huge holes into a system that is falling apart.
Anyway, Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Keep studying and may the Lord Bless You.
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/
8 Mike Beidler // Dec 15, 2007 at 4:31 am
not one verse claims the Parousia, resurection, Age to Come, or the New Heavens and earth, appeared or came PAST TENSE, in 70ad.
That makes sense, but only because the entire NT was written before AD 70.
9 Steve // Dec 15, 2007 at 2:27 pm
I was thinking the same thing, Mike!
10 preteristheresy // Dec 17, 2007 at 9:41 am
Yes, I do agree that the entire NT was written before AD70. SO WHAT? In my view, it does not matter, becuase the book is not about the shadows of historical and temporal events.
It is the reason why there is no inspired writter to record these things as a past historical event that I question. Why is there silence? Is this by God’s design becuase it really has NOTHING to do with historical events or time. But used shadows and images to point to the eternal and unseen. Why is God silent when it comes to saying something is Past. Why does God not reveal himself as a Preterist “a god of the past”? If he wanted to do so, it would have been part of his plan revealed through his Spirit.
I don’t understand why this is not a bigger deal among preterist since their entire system is a deduction, unscriptural (not one passage says IT HAPPENED).
Is this how God operates? Oh I see, this what FAITH really means.
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/
11 Steve // Dec 17, 2007 at 10:53 am
Turn that gun around on yourself: does your view have new scriptures being appended to the Bible stating the fulfillment of Revelation after the events take place in the future? Where does Scripture obligate itself to do so?
12 preteristheresy // Dec 17, 2007 at 3:27 pm
WHAT? Revelation is about the revealing of the removal of sin and death (not the removal itself), and the revealing of life in his kingdom (not that the event gave eternal life ). Sin and death is the issue, and can not be destroyed or removed by historical events. This removal or posession can not be a past or future event tied to historical events. Meaning the destruction of Jerusalem did not place you in the new covenant, nor did it remove your sin, death or seperation from God. If it did, there would be no reason to be born again. You were or have been in bondage to the flesh (covenant of death represented by the Mosiac Covenant) and if you are in Christ, you have been born again to the New Covenant of the Spirit. How is this process a past event, how did the old pass in 70ad, when you died to the old by being born again.
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/
Leave a Comment