Pre-trib

B

Bro Blue

Guest
Saw someone post that this can get blown out of the water, and I have no way of getting the book. In a few words, can anyone tell me why pre-trib would be wrong?
 
I find myself becoming more and more a "partial preterist".

In my opinion a "Pre-trib" view of eschatology is the most nonsensical system in existence today. The "seven church ages" is just one example of the silliness associated with the doctrine. The "seven churches" existed in the time "Revelation" was written. They were a representative picture of "Christiandom" in the first century. To say they represented future "church ages" is total nonsense.

Add the always moving belief that Matthew 24:34 ("this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled") is yet future.... and get nothing but confusion.

I mean... how many times is "this generation" going to be "another generation"?
 
Well I will chime in...I believe preterism is heretical (that is not partial, but full)...and I am pre-trib which only has to do with the timing of the rapture.  You can be partial in preterism and still be pre-trib...My problem would be not so much with those who may not be pre-trib but are pre-mil...but with those who are either A-mill of Post-mill.  For what its worth.
 
T-Bone said:
Well I will chime in...I believe preterism is heretical (that is not partial, but full)...and I am pre-trib which only has to do with the timing of the rapture.  You can be partial in preterism and still be pre-trib...My problem would be not so much with those who may not be pre-trib but are pre-mil...but with those who are either A-mill of Post-mill.  For what its worth.
Click to expand...

While a Full Preterist does believe the resurrection has taken place.... he will argue such a belief isn't contray to what Paul wrote in 2 Tim 2:18. They believe the resurrection took place after 2 Tim 2:18 was written and definitely after the death of the apostles. Not saying I believe such... just detailing what they believe.

I've been "pre-trib" most of my life but I have long considered some of its teachings to be less than accurate. I do look forward to the resurrection. Yet, I perfer not to call it the "rapture". As far as the teaching of the "Millenium".... I don't know exactly what to make of it. I think we have to admit....... most people don't.
 
christundivided said:
T-Bone said:
Well I will chime in...I believe preterism is heretical (that is not partial, but full)...and I am pre-trib which only has to do with the timing of the rapture.  You can be partial in preterism and still be pre-trib...My problem would be not so much with those who may not be pre-trib but are pre-mil...but with those who are either A-mill of Post-mill.  For what its worth.
Click to expand...

While a Full Preterist does believe the resurrection has taken place.... he will argue such a belief isn't contray to what Paul wrote in 2 Tim 2:18. They believe the resurrection took place after 2 Tim 2:18 was written and definitely after the death of the apostles. Not saying I believe such... just detailing what they believe.

I've been "pre-trib" most of my life but I have long considered some of its teachings to be less than accurate. I do look forward to the resurrection. Yet, I perfer not to call it the "rapture". As far as the teaching of the "Millenium".... I don't know exactly to make of it. I think have to admit....... most people don't.
Click to expand...

You are quite generous to the full preterist...he may argue the point of 2 Tim 2:18,,,but in context he would be wrong, and in the history of Christianity he would be wrong...and Paul calls him a cancer...I would call him a heretic! 8)
 
T-Bone said:
You are quite generous to the full preterist...he may argue the point of 2 Tim 2:18,,,but in context he would be wrong, and in the history of Christianity he would be wrong...and Paul calls him a cancer...I would call him a heretic! 8)
Click to expand...

The "Full Preterist" argument is hard to swallow  ;D

I agree a full resurrection in the first century is hard to explain in the context of history.
 
T-Bone said:
Well I will chime in...I believe preterism is heretical (that is not partial, but full)...and I am pre-trib which only has to do with the timing of the rapture.  You can be partial in preterism and still be pre-trib...My problem would be not so much with those who may not be pre-trib but are pre-mil...but with those who are either A-mill of Post-mill.  For what its worth.
Click to expand...
Since I'm Amill, am I a heretic in your eyes?
 
Timotheos said:
T-Bone said:
Well I will chime in...I believe preterism is heretical (that is not partial, but full)...and I am pre-trib which only has to do with the timing of the rapture.  You can be partial in preterism and still be pre-trib...My problem would be not so much with those who may not be pre-trib but are pre-mil...but with those who are either A-mill of Post-mill.  For what its worth.
Click to expand...
Since I'm Amill, am I a heretic in your eyes?
Click to expand...

Never have called Amil heretical....only full preterism...I would just call you mistaken.
 
Beale's commentary is pretty good.

I'm currently reading his NT biblical theology (excellent).  I am fairly certain that he's not a premillennialist either (so there is no rapture position).  And he is very sharp!  I highly recommend reading him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top