>>>That is hardly surprising - The orthodox Reformed are Partial-Preterist in their Eschatology.<<<
Partial Preterist? That is like being partly pregnant. It is a nonsenical term.
>>>That your literature is within the Preterist camp isn’t to be doubted.<<<
It is very much to be doubted. A serious researcher will not be blinded by the headlines, but will find out the actual positions of the individual(s) in question. One with the intent to smear, will ignore even hard evidence to the contrary. Which are you?
Now, if you insist on claiming that preterism, which by definition means “all prophecy was fulfilled upon the destruction of Jerusalem,” is the same as postmillennialism, which by definition means, “Christ will resurrect us in the future,” then please add a tagline that reads “partially-deceptive.”
>>>”Yahoo: Dwight Wilson Preterist At the very least, simple searches show the Preterists using the literature you recommend as proofs in themselves.”<<<
At least you are not batting “0”. One thing you may not realize is that many postmillennialists wear the “preterist” label as a badge of honor. They assume that anything a futurist disapproves of can only be a good thing. LOL!
But I am not one of them, because many Dispensationalist have been indoctrinated into “poisoning the well” with smears like “heresy” and other slanderous words, against anyone who opposes their non-biblical, “dual covenant” theology. And that is a fact that cannot be ignored.
Even Cynical Bear, the person you are defending, has already smeared me with the heretic label. That is why I have a universal definition for heretic: a heretic is anyone who labels me a heretic.
However, I also have more specific definitions, such as the denial of Christ.
>>>No need to explain - I too spent years intentionally focused upon the Book. I know that seclusion well. That is where I came to question the supercessionist, partial-preterist, ultra orthodox Calvinist religion of my yoot. If I see where you are, it is because I used to be there.<<<
Show me from the scriptures what you used to believe. I am very curious.
Philip
There ya go again!!!!
No, it is a definitive term and a subset of Preterism, as distinct from Full-Preterism:
Partial preterism
Partial preterism holds that most eschatological prophecies, such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the Antichrists, the Great Tribulation, and the advent of the Day of the Lord as a "judgment-coming" of Christ, were fulfilled either in AD 70[30] or during the persecution of Christians under the Emperor Nero.[31][32] Some partial preterists identify " Babylon the Great" (Revelation 17–18) with the pagan Roman Empire, though some, such as N.T. Wright and David Chilton, identify it with the city of Jerusalem.[30][33] Most interpretations identify Nero as the Beast,[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][a] while his mark is often interpreted as the stamped image of the emperor's head on every coin of the Roman Empire: the stamp on the hand or in the mind of all, without which no one could buy or sell.[41] However, others believe the Book of Revelation was written after Nero committed suicide in AD 68, and identify the Beast with another emperor. The Catholic Encyclopedia has noted that Revelation was "written during the latter part of the reign of the Roman Emperor Domitian, probably in AD 95 or 96".[42] Many Protestant scholars agree.[43][44] The Second coming and the resurrection of the dead, however, have not yet occurred in the partial preterist system.[45]
Wikipedia:Preterism #Partial-Preterism
[roamer_1:] That your literature is within the Preterist camp isn’t to be doubted.
It is very much to be doubted. A serious researcher will not be blinded by the headlines, but will find out the actual positions of the individual(s) in question. One with the intent to smear, will ignore even hard evidence to the contrary. Which are you?
That's hardly fair - I have already explained my familiarity with it, especially from a hard-core Calvinist position... I hardly need to inquire again to understand the premise.
Now, if you insist on claiming that preterism, which by definition means “all prophecy was fulfilled upon the destruction of Jerusalem,” [...]
Not as a sphere of eschatology, as demonstrated above... It CAN mean that, in the Full-Preterist sense - but not all Preterists ARE Full-Preterist.
[...] is the same as postmillennialism, which by definition means, “Christ will resurrect us in the future,” then please add a tagline that reads “partially-deceptive.”
No... Perhaps you are misunderstanding the full context of Post-Millenialism. That may be where we are getting cross-threaded.
[roamer_1:] Yahoo: Dwight Wilson Preterist At the very least, simple searches show the Preterists using the literature you recommend as proofs in themselves.”
At least you are not batting “0”. One thing you may not realize is that many postmillennialists wear the “preterist” label as a badge of honor. They assume that anything a futurist disapproves of can only be a good thing. LOL!
Yes, I know. But the very precepts of post millenialism (and amillenialism) require at least partial-preterism by their very nature. Pre-mil claims the Kingdom has not come, and hence most futurists and historists are pre-mil. Post-mil and a-mil both consider the last two thousand years to BE the Kingdom, and merely quibble over the time stack.,, But for the Kingdom to be here and now, that necessarily requires at least the partial-preterist viewpoint, as one must declare the OT mostly fulfilled and most of the prophets too, in order to be in the Kingdom currently.
But I am not one of them, because many Dispensationalist have been indoctrinated into “poisoning the well” with smears like “heresy” and other slanderous words, against anyone who opposes their non-biblical, “dual covenant” theology. And that is a fact that cannot be ignored.
Well, your comments on this board certainly lean strongly toward it. And I say that from a position that is certainly not dispy, nor dual-covenant.
Even Cynical Bear, the person you are defending, has already smeared me [...]
What follows is a bit personal, and I do not mean it in any sense other than helping you to get the hang of how things are here:
Look. we play hard-ball here. No sense walking around all buttsore over everything. I am not defending smears. Folks have done as much to me and more, and no doubt I have done the same. But I would suggest moderation on your part (the mod would appreciate it no doubt), and refrain from returning fire, or you won't last long here, guaranteed. It is FINE to criticize groups, as hardcore as you like (within proper decorum), but it is not fine to criticize individual FReepers. That is making it personal. When in rebuttal, and the word 'you' enters your reply, whenever at all possible, figger out a way to make it 'y'all'... or even better, 'all y'all'. You can hack on beliefs, denominations, theories, etc. all you like, but hacking on persons (freepers) is a quick ticket to ride the lightning. So get a thick skin, and let insults fall off like water off a duck's back. Then the other guy gets the spankin'. it takes two to feud, so often the retort is the one that is noticed. Hope this helps.
[roamer_1] No need to explain - I too spent years intentionally focused upon the Book. I know that seclusion well. That is where I came to question the supercessionist, partial-preterist, ultra orthodox Calvinist religion of my yoot. If I see where you are, it is because I used to be there.
Show me from the scriptures what you used to believe. I am very curious.
I can't cuz it ain't there. That's why I am not Calvinist so much anymore. Besides, that would take a huge post, and I am already prone to be overly loquacious. Never use one word when three will do. :)
But if you like that sort of thing, I would suggest hanging out with Presbyterian (OPC or PCA), Conservative Christian Reformed or Dutch Reformed, or some Reformed/Calvinist Baptists. They all tend to be a-mil or post-mil, and no doubt you will find much to agree with.