[the_doc]

One of the reasons why I spent two posts denouncing full-preterism is because I want to go on record that amills don’t coddle full-preterists. We regard them as scoffers. The fact that there is a kind of “partial preterism” inherent in amillennialism doesn’t even being to suggest that amills are closer to full-preterism than premills are.

(I have known only two professing Christians who have jumped into full-preterism. And they were never dogmatic amills as I am. As best as I can tell, they were actually leaning toward premillennialism before they became full-preterists.)

***

The second reason why I used the full-preterists to illustrate the seriousness of Peter’s warning is that the overall position of the full-preterists actually illustrates something else about Peter’s situation—something else which you did not bother to cover very well in your #2158.

I am referring to the fact that many people in the apostolic period believed that the Lord had promised to return soon. The full-preterists invariably key on this. It’s actually one of their main arguments.

In his 600-page book The Parousia, James Stuart Russell spends literally hundreds of pages arguing from text after text after text that this idea of soonness is so conspicuous in the Scriptures that God surely fulfilled His promise in 70 A.D. He said that God is a liar if He didn’t come back and fulfill all of His promises in 70 A.D.

The problem with this argument is that Peter immediately and completely crushes it. Peter says, in effect, that God’s idea of soon is not the same thing as man’s idea of soon (v.8).

So, Russell was a blaspheming idiot who wasted hundreds of pages.

[the_doc]

I think I'll let you digest my last three posts before we go on. Let me know when you're ready.

Things will get more interesting shortly, I believe.

[RnMomof7]

The church ordains fulll preterists.They Pastor churches...

You are a partial preterist.. distinguish the difference

[theAmbassador]

One of the reasons why I spent two posts denouncing full-preterism is because I want to go on record that amills don’t coddle full-preterists. We regard them as scoffers.

I'll have to go back and read your posts. I'll say that full Preterism and also PostMillennialism present a fairly dangerous heresy in the Reformed Church. Though, I'm not sure how many full Preterists there are among our Reformed churches, PostMillennialism does have a large following. And, sadly, it leaves their followers ill prepared for the tribulation struggles which we will face in this world.

[theAmbassador]

Of course, PreMillennialism does have problems as well. These enemies of the Lord will masquerade as believers in this glorious kingdom reign of Christ on this earth. They are double minded and unstable in all their ways. As the Psalter puts it, "because Thy statutes are despised, with overwhelming grief I weep." So much for this "glorious" kingdom.

There will be no vision of God in the face of Jesus Christ in this kingdom. Still only in a glass darkly.

For these reasons, and more, we Reformed Amillennialists don't have any excitement about the possibility that we might be wrong. We would still be groaning with all of creation, as we do today, waiting for the redemption of our bodies and the whole world. (Rom 8:22-23) We would still "cry out day and night to Him" for divine vengeance against those who have slaughtered us. (Luke 18:7, Rom 8:36)

Of course, the PreMillennialists tells us that the only reason we wait, for the Lord can reign glorious on earth or heaven, is so that they can have their 1000 years. In orther words, PreMillennialism is all about man, not the Lord. It is "Much ado about nothing!"

What excites us Amillennialists is that when the Lord returns, it will be THE Day of vengeance of our God where He will flood the earth with fire (2 Peter 3:9). Then, we will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of our Father.