Adherants of Preterism?

Discussion in 'Revelation & Eschatology' started by Stope, Apr 17, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Stope

    Stope Puritan Board Sophomore

    I dont know much about eschatology, but Im listening to an advocate of Preterisim. I had a few questions:

    1. Who adheres to this?
    2. When was this view first espoused?
    3. Thoughts on Preterism?
  2. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Partial or Full?
  3. Stope

    Stope Puritan Board Sophomore

  4. Ask Mr. Religion

    Ask Mr. Religion Flatly Unflappable Staff Member

    The last time I checked, R.C. Sproul would be among those partial preterists that hold that many of the prophecies of the future were fulfilled in the first century—chiefly in the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Most partial preterists say that the first twenty chapters of Revelation have taken place while the last two chapters have yet to be fulfilled. Partial preterists tend to be postmillennial in their thinking, holding that the millennium (not a literal one thousand years) began with the first advent of Christ.
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  5. Stope

    Stope Puritan Board Sophomore

    Thanks! Can you, or anyone recommend, a treatment of the pros and cons?

    Also, what do we say to the fact that many of the people we love were Historicists?
  6. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    What would we need to say? I am not a historicist myself, but I don't see anything outrageous with the position.
  7. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    On the Olivet Discourse they would adopt preterist interpretations.

    On Revelation, if one adopts the idealist view he can still appreciate both the "preterist" and "historicist" applications.
  8. arapahoepark

    arapahoepark Puritan Board Senior

    Look up Ken Gentry. Quite a few of his books are free online. The beast of Revelation is one.

    I stated in another thread that basically Preterism sees the Olivet Discourse at face value; that the generation Jesus stated was the generation at that time.
    It was pretty much undisputed in Church history. Revelation as an expanded Olivet, less so.

    And I am a preterist. Sums up my views....
  9. Ask Mr. Religion

    Ask Mr. Religion Flatly Unflappable Staff Member

    You might see Sproul's The Last Days According to Jesus wherein Sproul lays out his arguments for his position:

    This short article discusses some pros and cons as well as footnoting other materials:
  10. Ed Walsh

    Ed Walsh Puritan Board Sophomore

    were? :)
  11. Josh Williamson

    Josh Williamson Puritan Board Freshman

    That is a good point. I currently flick between historicist and preterism. Do you have any resources you could recommend on the idealist view?
  12. Jerusalem Blade

    Jerusalem Blade Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    Here (attached) is a critique of both full and partial preterism from Dean Davis' book, The High King of Heaven, an excellent examination of hermeneutical principles applied to eschatology:

    Attached Files:

  13. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Graduate

    I am a futurist myself, so a partial preterst would see the second coming/eternal state as the only thing yet to happen? If so, what is the major distinction between that view and A Mil?
  14. JimmyH

    JimmyH Puritan Board Junior

  15. lynnie

    lynnie Puritan Board Senior

    Joel McDermon wrote a good book called Jesus V Jerusalem, going through Luke and the many things Jesus spoke that were actually references to the coming judgment on Jeusalem, not just parables with some sort of moral lesson.
  16. arapahoepark

    arapahoepark Puritan Board Senior

    You can be an amill and Preterist but, I have noticed a lot of amills are futurists positing that either the Olivet discourse, or some of it is future, and/or the book of Revelation as futurist/idealist but not in the dispensationalist scheme.
  17. Eleftheria

    Eleftheria Puritan Board Freshman

    You can find the answer to your first 2 questions here:

    If you can get past the 1990's website style, this site is great for seeing who holds various preterist views, including early church fathers:

    Jay E. Adams for example is a Partial Preterist Amillennialist (The Time Is at Hand, 2004)
    R.C. Sproul is a Partial Preterist PostMil (The Last Days according to Jesus: When Did Jesus Say He Would Return?, 2000

    I'm personally persuaded by Jay Adams of the Amil view, and by him and RC of the Partial Preterist view.
  18. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Amils can be partial preterists. Jay Adams is one. Preterism is how you interpret certain texts. Amillennialism is the timing of the millennium.
  19. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Graduate

    So partial Preterists would see all prophecy fulfilled save for Second Coming, while both preMils/AMils would see that there could be a coming Antichrist, bad times, world events before Second coming? Mainly disagree on what happens at that time, AMil that Eternal state ushered in, premils the Millennium, and then the Eternal state comes in?
  20. MW

    MW Puritan Board Doctor

    The resources I recommend are B. B. Warfield, The Millennium and the Apocalypse, in Biblical Doctrines, 643ff.; William Milligan's Expositor's Commentary on Revelation; and William Hendriksen's More than Conquerors. The first two were consistent throughout in applying their principles of interpretation. Hendriksen moved in the direction of futurism concerning the tribulation, but was restrained to a certain degree by his commitment to principles like recapitulation and progressive parallelism. A similar tendency is to be found in Herman Hoeksema, Behold He Cometh. Rousas Rushdoony has a helpful work on Daniel and Revelation which is strong for its this-worldly emphasis, but it also contains his anti-statist rhetoric, which does not appear to me to fit what these books are teaching, though the rhetoric has an appropriate application today.

    The strength of idealism is its inaugurated eschatology -- the coming kingdom has penetrated the present. Two helpful books on inaugurated eschatology are Herman Ridderbos, Coming of the Kingdom; and Anthony Hoekema, The Bible and the Future. Again, there are some futurist ideas concerning the tribulation with which I do not agree. There is also Geerhardus Vos' Pauline Eschatology, but one will want to be already acquainted with the basic ideas in order to gain the most from this work.
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  21. Ed Walsh

    Ed Walsh Puritan Board Sophomore

    WARNING: This is a bit off the subject, but to me, it is very encouraging as to the future of the Kingdom of God during this present dispensation. (Plus, I just happen to have it online)


    “We have reason to believe,” writes Charles Hodge, “...that the number finally lost in comparison with the whole number of the saved will be very inconsiderable. Our blessed Lord, when surrounded by the innumerable company of the redeemed, will be hailed as the ‘Salvator Hominum,’ the Saviour of men, as the Lamb that bore the sins of the world.”
  22. arapahoepark

    arapahoepark Puritan Board Senior

    I have seen that this is generally the case but, not always.

    What gets me are the Dispensationalists, or uber futurists arguing over pre-, mid-, prewrath-, or post trib raptures. That's a whole other thing. And its quite weird....
  23. KMK

    KMK Moderator Staff Member


    Referring to hyperpreterists as 'full preterists' gives them a sense of orthodoxy they do not deserve.

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  24. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Graduate

    I was a teaching elder in the AOG, and also was raised up to hold to the rapture, so yeah, much of that is weird!
  25. JesusIsLord

    JesusIsLord Puritan Board Freshman

    I found this incredibly helpful brother. The local church I attend is PP and our Pastor is currently teaching thought Matthew.

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
  26. Jerusalem Blade

    Jerusalem Blade Puritan Board Post-Graduate

    I excerpt from a paper I’ve written concerning characteristics of the contemporary idealist view (there are older idealist views which are not the same). The contemporary strain of idealism is called “eclectic” or “modified” idealism.

    It is accepted that the “eclectic” or “modified idealist” view (Beale)[1] allows some departure from the idealist, though as to where the line is drawn there is no clear consensus. Beale himself says, “...certainly there are prophecies of the future in Revelation. The crucial yet problematic task of the interpreter is to identify through careful exegesis and against the historical background those texts which pertain respectively to past present and future.”[2]​

    [1] G.K. Beale, New International Greek Testament Commentary: Revelation (Eerdmans 1999), pp 48, 49.
    [2] Ibid., p 49.


    Vern Poythress talks about this also, in his book, The Returning King. He sums up his section on interpretation with these words,

    Combining the Insights of the Schools

    All the schools except the historicist school have considerable merit. Can we somehow combine them? If we start with the idealist approach, it is comparatively easy to see how. The images in Revelation enjoy multiple fulfillments. They do so because they embody a general pattern. The arguments in favor of futurism show convincingly that Revelation is interested in the Second Coming and the immediately preceding final crisis (cf. 2 Thess. 2:1-12). But fulfillment in the final crisis does not eliminate earlier instances of the general pattern. We have both a general pattern and a particular embodiment of the pattern in the final crisis.

    Likewise, the arguments in favor of preterism show convincingly that Revelation is interested in the seven churches and their historic situation. The symbols thus have a particular embodiment in the first century, and we ought to pay attention to this embodiment.

    Finally, we have a responsibility to apply the message of Revelation to our own situation, because we are somewhere in church history, somewhere in the interadvent period to which the book applies. Here is the grain of truth in the historicist approach.

    We can sum up these insights in a single combined picture. The major symbols of Revelation represent a repeated pattern. This pattern has a realization in the first century situation of the seven churches. It also has an embodiment in the final crisis. And it has an embodiment now. We pay special attention to the embodiment now, because we must apply the lessons of Revelation to where we are. (p 37)​
  27. Ray

    Ray Puritan Board Freshman

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page