# Preterism questions.



## Jash Comstock (May 10, 2014)

Could someone explain the various types of preterism to me?


----------



## chatwithstumac (May 11, 2014)

If someone knows of a graph for pre, a, post mill and full and partial preterism, I'd love to have it. One can never have enough graphs.


----------



## Peairtach (May 11, 2014)

Jash Comstock said:


> Could someone explain the various types of preterism to me?



Some forms of pteterism are utterly heretical, sometimes called "hyper-preterism" or "full-preterism"; people taking things to ridiculous and biblically unjustified extremes and falling off the edge into the abyss, sometimes reacting to a prior grounding in dispensationslism and futurism. Those who say that the second advent, the resurrection of the righteous and wicked and the judgment day happened in the first century are heretics and their writings are to be avoided.

Many/most(?) orthodox commentators will see some reference to the events of the first century in the Olivet Discourse, and also to some extent in the Apocalypse, but I think they are off kilter and maybe reacting to futurism when they try to squeeze all of Revelation 5-19 into the first century (Gentry), or into the period up to the Fall of Rome (Bahnsen). 

Traditionally postmillenialists have been historicist or a mix of historicist and idealist. Some of the reconstructionists/theonomians have taken a more radical preterist approach and sought to popularose it.

Patrick Fairbairn's " The Interpretation of Prophecy" (BoT) is a good place to start, being sound and balanced, for this somewhat difficult area.

The scholars seem to be using Revelation 5-19 like a squeezebox, the futurists squeezing it one way, the preterists another. It is probably wise to avoid the extreme but orthodox preterism of Bahnsen or Gentry - although things may be learned from their writings regarding more moderate pretrist views on some aspects of Revelation - and also avoid futurism (including dispensationalism) that would place all of Revelation 5-19 in the future.

A moderate idealism or idealism with some elements of historicism seems to be the correct approach.


Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (May 11, 2014)

This may be useful: View attachment Eschatology Comparisons.pdf


----------



## One Little Nail (May 12, 2014)

Jash Comstock said:


> Could someone explain the various types of preterism to me?





Peairtach said:


> Some forms of Preterism are utterly heretical, sometimes called "hyper-preterism" or "full-preterism"; people taking things to ridiculous and biblically unjustified extremes and falling off the edge into the abyss, sometimes reacting to a prior grounding in dispensationslism and futurism. Those who say that the second advent, the resurrection of the righteous and wicked and the judgment day happened in the first century are heretics and their writings are to be avoided.



Though there is a sense in which the AD70 Destruction of Jerusalem was a coming of The Lord, as per Old Testament examples, a coming in judgment fulfilled in Matt 24 ( Historicists hold this ) but not the end of time, Literal & Bodily Return of The Lord Jesus Christ or 2nd Coming, Resurrection & Final judgment as Richard well remarks these peoples writings are Heretical & should be avoided, actually these people should be avoided.



Peairtach said:


> Many/most(?) orthodox commentators will see some reference to the events of the first century in the Olivet Discourse, and also to some extent in the Apocalypse, but I think they are off kilter and maybe reacting to futurism when they try to squeeze all of Revelation 5-19 into the first century (Gentry), or into the period up to the Fall of Rome (Bahnsen).



There definitely off kilter even Heretical I would say, these two belong to the reconstructionists party which seems to have picked up on what Ellicott in his 4th Vol of Horæ Apocalypticæ refers to as Neronic or Germanic Praeterist Counter Reformation scheme, explaining the Apocalypse as fulfilled in the catostrophies that befell the Jews, Gentrys position, it was mainly held by German Higher Critics & Rationalists of the 18th Century, 
& the other form being the Romish Praeterist Counter Reformation scheme which explains away the Apocalypse by stating that it was fulfilled with the fall of the Pagan Roman Empire, Bahnsens position, unofficially held by the Romish "church", formulated by the Jesuit Alcasar to take the heat off the Reformers teaching that the papacy is the Anti-Christ.

Here are a few links to Critiques of Preterism - A collection of on-line booklets refuting partial and full preterism. 
Eschatology
Eschatology
http://www.puritans.net/fullpreterism.html

and a link to Elliotts 4th Vol of Horæ Apocalypticæ
Horæ Apocalypticæ: Or, a Commentary on the Apocalypse, Critical and ... - Edward Bishop Elliott - Google Books



Peairtach said:


> Traditionally postmillenialists have been historicist or a mix of historicist and idealist. Some of the reconstructionists/theonomians sic (theonomists) have taken a more radical preterist approach and sought to popularose it.



Historicism is the traditional Reformed Eschatological Theology, as encapsulated in The Reformed Confessions.

What is Historicism? from Historicism.net Welcome to the Web Site of the Historicism Research Foundation.

If you are like many Christians, you probably have never heard of this method of interpreting Biblical prophecy. Historicism is unlike Preterism, which teaches that most of prophecy has been fulfilled in the past. It also differs from Futurism, which teaches that prophecy will only be fulfilled at some future date. In brief, Historicism teaches that biblical predictions are being fulfilled throughout history and continue to be fulfilled today. The Book of Revelation is a pre-written history of the Church from the time of its writing to the future Second Advent of Christ, which shall usher in the new heaven and new earth.

Preterism has little to say to us today since it inteprets predictions as mostly fulfilled. Futurism is beyond the Church, because most Futurists believe that a secret rapture will remove the Church from the world. However, if the Bible and Revelation speak to the Church in ALL ages (as Historicism teaches), it is of great importance that we listen.

Historicists agree on the following unique concepts:

* The "Year-Day" principle - In prophetic language, a day of symbolic time represents a year of actual, historic time.
* The "Time, Times and Half a time," "3 1/2 years," "1260 days", and "42 month" time period, which occurs seven times in Daniel and Revelation, is understood by Historicists to be fulfilled in history.
* All Historicists believe that the Papacy is that Anti-Christ, the Man of Sin of II Thessalonians 2, and a Beast of Revelation 13.
* Historicists generally agree Revelation 9 speaks of the Muslim scourge which afflicted Christendom.
* All Historicists agree that the Book of Revelation prophesies the history of the Church from the Apostolic Era to the future Second Advent of Jesus Christ.
* The Historicist interpretation was the standard interpretation from Wycliffe to Spurgeon (500 years) and is known as the Protestant interpretation in distinct contrast to Preterism and Futurism which were Jesuit interpretations contrived during the counterreformation.

Additionally, the Reformational confessions have adopted the Historicist interpretation including the Irish Articles (1615), the original Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), the Savoy Declaration (1658), and the London Baptist Confession (1688).


----------

