Announcement

Collapse

Eschatology 201 Guidelines

This area of the forum is primarily for Christian theists to discuss orthodox views of Eschatology. Other theist participation is welcome within that framework, but only within orthodoxy. Posts from nontheists that do not promote atheism or seek to undermine the faith of others will be permitted at the Moderator's discretion - such posters should contact the area moderators before posting.


Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.

However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.

End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.

Millennialism- post-, pre- a-

Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.

From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.

OK folks, let's roll!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

What is the Orthodox Preterist position on the Parousia?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Hi Robby and welcome to TheologyWeb. I am a moderator in this section and this section is reserved for the discussion of orthodox Christian doctrines only, and thus full preterism/hyperpreterism falls outside those boundaries. They can be discussed in the Unorthodox Theology section. (Please see the guidelines for this section here: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/announcement.php?f=48 ) Let me or any other staff member know if you have any more questions. Thanks!
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
      Hi Robby and welcome to TheologyWeb. I am a moderator in this section and this section is reserved for the discussion of orthodox Christian doctrines only, and thus full preterism/hyperpreterism falls outside those boundaries. They can be discussed in the Unorthodox Theology section. (Please see the guidelines for this section here: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/announcement.php?f=48 ) Let me or any other staff member know if you have any more questions. Thanks!
      Ok, thanks. I'll delete the post.

      Comment


      • #18
        Back to the OP.....

        I'm not sure what the orthodox preterist view of 'parousia' is, but I know that most futurists don't understand the difference between 'parousia' and 'erchomai'. Pre-tribs especially abuse the meaning in order to justify their belief. Both words are translated as 'coming' and that causes a lot of the confusion in English since we don't see a difference. But 'erchomai' is a verb and refers to physical movement from point A to point B. 'Parousia', on the other hand, is a noun and refers to an event; it includes the idea of a physical movement, but extends that through an indefinite time that also means continued presence.

        That being said, you can have many 'erchomai' comings within a single 'parousia' coming. That is what we see in the NT from a futurist perspective. The Second Coming is NOT just a single event at one moment in time (i.e. the Battle of Armageddon), rather it is an extended event over many years that includes many separate happenings. 'Erchomai' passages can potentially conflict if they are forced to happen at the same moment. 'Parousia' passages with contradicting details do not necessitate different 'parousias' however, because all of the events can happen under the over-arching banner of the Second Parousia.

        Christ's First Coming was not a single event at one moment in time; so why would any futurist expect His Second Coming to be so?


        tharkun

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          Christ came in judgment in AD 70. 1 Thes. 4 is a future coming. Does that help?
          Partial Preterist and Amills believe that most of the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in AD 70 and that 1st century Jerusalem is shown in Revelation 17, 18, and 19. Amills believe the 1000yr period is symbolic and their view is that we are in that period now.

          Revelation 18:7 ‘As much as she did glorify herself and did revel, so much torment and sorrow give to her, because in her heart she saith, 'I sit a queen, and a widow I am not, and sorrow I shall not see' 8 Because of this, in one day, shall come her plagues, death, and sorrow, and famine; and in fire she shall be utterly burned, because strong [is] the Lord God who is judging her;
          ========

          Where the word for "parousia" G3952 and it's different forms occurs in the NT.
          Only 4 times in the Gospels, all in Matthew 24:

          παρουσία — 6x
          παρουσίᾳ — 9x
          παρουσίαν — 3x
          παρουσίας — 6x
          ============

          παρουσία/parousiaV<3952> — 6x
          Parsing: Genitive Feminine Singular

          Matthew 24:3;
          Philippians 1:26;
          2 Thessalonians 2:1,8;
          James 5:7
          2 Peter 3:4
          =============

          παρουσία/parousia<3952> — 6x
          Parsing: Nominative Feminine Singular

          Matthew 24:27, 37, 39;
          2 Corinthians 10:10
          2 Thessalonians 2:9
          James 5:8
          ===============

          παρουσίᾳ<3952> — 9x
          Parsing: Dative Feminine Singular

          1 Corinthians 15:23
          1 Corinthians 16:17
          2 Corinthians 7:6, 7
          Philippians 2:12
          1 Thessalonians 2:19
          1 Thessalonians 3:13
          1 Thessalonians 5:23
          1 John 2:28
          ======

          παρουσίαν/parousian <3952> — 3x
          Parsing: Accusative Feminine Singular

          1 Thessalonians 4:15
          2 Peter 1:16
          2 Peter 3:12
          =========================
          I highly recommend this site on the Preterist view of the Parousia:

          http://www.preteristarchive.com/Part...ism/index.html

          70ad:
          A coming (parousia) of Christ
          A day of the Lord
          A judgment
          The end of the Jewish Age
          (Source: R.C. Sproul, Last Days)

          Still future:
          The Coming (parousia) of Christ
          The Day of the Lord
          The Resurrection of the dead
          The Rapture of the living
          The (final) Judgment
          The end of history

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
            I think as long as they acknowledge a future bodily resurrection, it is considered orthodox. However, some of them have what I consider fairly stupid beliefs, such as a first-century rapture. Most preterists just distinguish the 1 Thessalonians 4 and 1 Corinthians 15 passages from Matthew 24, and there are disagreements on most of the other passages.
            Originally posted by Manwë Súlimo View Post
            Erm? Are there preterists out there that believe in a rapture at all?
            Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
            I've seen preterists actually argue that God snatched away all the Christians in the first century, leaving the church to start over. To me, that concept runs counter to pretty much the entire concept of even having a church. It contradicts the mustard seed parable, for example. Also, it contradicts the fairly obvious implication from John 21:23 that John eventually died.
            Hello.
            A lot of Preterists and Amills view 1st century Jerusalem as that great City in Revelation. [would make for a good thread].

            Revelation 18:
            18 And they cried, observing the smoke of Her burning, saying, "What is like to the great City?"
            19 and they cast dust upon their heads, and cried, lamenting, weeping and mourning, saying,
            "Woe! woe! the great City! in which are rich all those having ships in the sea, out of Her preciousness,
            for to one hour was She was desolated.

            https://www.preteristarchive.com/chr...study-archive/
            Interpretation of, in the Early Church

            Luke 21:20-22: “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies.. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it; for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written.” RSV
            Revelation 18:4 And I hear another Voice out of the heaven saying "come forth out of Her! My people....."


            Eusebius: “The members of the Jerusalem church by means of an oracle, given by revelation to acceptable persons there, were ordered to leave the city before the war began and settle in a town in Peraea called Pella.” Book III, 5:4

            https://www.preteristarchive.com/Jew..._military.html

            CHRONOLOGY IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING THE WAR

            Stage 1: Murder of James the Just, "Opposition High Priest" ; Irrevocable Split: 62
            Stage 2: General Revolt in Jerusalem ; Zealot Occupation of Masada: August-September 66
            Stage 3: The Campaign of Cestius Gallus and the Defeat of the Twelfth Legion: October-November 66
            Stage 4: End of Collaborative Government, Priesthood ; General Flight: November 66 - March 67
            Part 6: Vespasian Subdues Northern and Western Palestine: December 66 - December 68
            Part 7: Three-way Power Struggle within Jerusalem After Roman Retreat: January 68 - May 70
            Part 8: Romans Breach City Walls and Leave Jerusalem Desolate: May 10 - September 10, 70

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y741QbT1YEo

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by LittleLambofJesus View Post
              Partial Preterist and Amills believe that most of the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in AD 70 and that 1st century Jerusalem is shown in Revelation 17, 18, and 19. Amills believe the 1000yr period is symbolic and their view is that we are in that period now.

              <snip>
              More or less. I'm not sure why you chose my post to launch a mini-lecture on it, since it's pretty much my position.
              I highly recommend this site on the Preterist view of the Parousia:

              http://www.preteristarchive.com/Part...ism/index.html
              Eh, PreteristArchive is a hyperpreterist site. I'd be cautious in enthusiastically recommending them.
              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
              sigpic
              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

              Comment

              widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
              Working...
              X