preterism and millenial positions...

[potato sundae]

hey,

alrighty, I'm reading the book "A Case For Amillenialism" by Kim Riddlebarger(anyone read it?).

I would call myself a "partial-preterist", but this book is presenting some very good challenges to the preterist understanding of eschatology(my opinion).

But there is one thing that Riddlebarger mentioned that I would like to get cleared up. On page 30 he says: "Most preterists are postmillennial, though not all postmillenarians are preterists." I recall someone saying they were an "amillenial preterist", while others have said they are "postmillenial preterists".

So basically I just want to get some of the preterists' thoughts on millenial positions and where they stand, and if someone could explain the millenium as it relates to preterism in more detail.

thanks

[dizzle]

Ack! give me some time... but amill fits in fine with preterism, though I am postmill

And I dunno what he says abuot Matt 24:34 but that is a mouth stopper to all other positions IMHO.

[potato sundae]

Ack! give me some time...
:teeth: DONT WORRY you have plenty of time respond.

[dynomite]

But there is one thing that Riddlebarger mentioned that I would like to get cleared up. On page 30 he says: "Most preterists are postmillennial, though not all postmillenarians are preterists." I recall someone saying they were an "amillenial preterist", while others have said they are "postmillenial preterists".

From my experience, the revival of preterism has revolved around the Christian Reconstructionist/Theonomist movement, which is dedicated (for the most part) to post-millennial escahtology. Therefore, "most preterists are postmillennial". This also fits in with the idea that the "Great Tribulation" being past, so there is optimism for the future, because the "last days" are past. The "amillinnial preterist" would be interesting, because, as I am sure Dr. Riddlebarger is arguing, there is usually a governing hermeneutic involved with the amill position, which understands "last days" different than the postmill. My 2 cents.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

From my experience, the revival of preterism has revolved around the Christian Reconstructionist/Theonomist movement, which is dedicated (for the most part) to post-millennial escahtology. Therefore, "most preterists are postmillennial". This also fits in with the idea that the "Great Tribulation" being past, so there is optimism for the future, because the "last days" are past. The "amillinnial preterist" would be interesting, because, as I am sure Dr. Riddlebarger is arguing, there is usually a governing hermeneutic involved with the amill position, which understands "last days" different than the postmill. My 2 cents.
Well not all postmill preterist are Christian Reconstructionist/Theonomist. I'm not.

I also think that an optomistic amill position is extremely close to my postmill position.

:2cents:

[studyhound]

Well not all postmill preterist are Christian Reconstructionist/Theonomist. I'm not.

I also think that an optomistic amill position is extremely close to my postmill position.

:2cents:
Ya i would fall in to "optomistic amill position" camp.

:studyhound:

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

I was asked in a PM to explain why we are optimistic. I do not have the scripture reference at the ready and wondered if some of my optisitic fellow could help?

If not I will try to answer later.

[John Reece]

I was asked in a PM to explain why we are optimistic. I do not have the scripture reference at the ready and wondered if some of my optisitic fellow could help?

If not I will try to answer later.

Speaking only for myself:

My mind has been disabused of premillennial presuppositions, so that I now no longer project into the future of the world the eschatological denouement predicted to happen within the lifetime of Jesus' contemporaries.

I now see the teleological nature of what Paul wrote in Ephesians, and I do not underestimate the power at work in the Body of Christ - a power that cannot be thwarted from the fulfillment for which it is destined.

[potato sundae]

Speaking only for myself:

My mind has been disabused of premillennial presuppositions, so that I now no longer project into the future of the world the eschatological denouement predicted to happen within the lifetime of Jesus' contemporaries.

I now see the teleological nature of what Paul wrote in Ephesians, and I do not underestimate the power at work in the Body of Christ - a power that cannot be thwarted from the fulfillment for which it is destined.


so you're postmillenial?

[John Reece]

so you're postmillennial?

Nope.

My mind has been disabused of postmillennial as well as premillennial presuppositions.

[airbornisgood4u]

Ack! give me some time... but amill fits in fine with preterism, though I am postmill

And I dunno what he says abuot Matt 24:34 but that is a mouth stopper to all other positions IMHO.

He says that "After the tribulation of those days" is talking about the overall tribulation of the world until Christ returns, so he splits the discourse there. He then interprets "This generation" to refer to all "These things" but says that since Jesus says that all these things would mark when he is close (but hasn't returned YET), he doesn't interpret Jesus referring to "this generation" when he talks about himself coming on the clouds. Dennis Hagner, and D.A. Carson take this position. I find it makes a lot of sense of some passages, but sort of eliminates a preterist interp of revelation although it relieves Paul's allusions to the Olivet Discourse not making sense. Because now the language he uses would be referring to the resurrection in both the olivet discourse and thessalonians.