In short, if one cannot present a clear, consistent argument from all of the relevant material, then one begins to make a series of exceptions in order to excuse away the apparent inconsistencies. Such a way of argument is the stuff of politicians. Continue reading “Sam Frost: Critique of Stevens’ View of Resurrection (2018)”
One other fallback position would be to renounce their premillennialism for preterism. They could then say the charismata terminated in the 1C because Christ returned in the 1C, appearances to the contrary not withstanding. Continue reading “Steve Hays: MacArthurite Preterists (Charismata and Cessationism) – (2013)”
Many full preterists started as cessationists from the Church of Christ or other similar groups, and to be honest that lens caused them to find what they were looking for. But as you can see, the Bible teaches an increasing kingdom with the miracle power of God working throughout this age. Continue reading “Chuck Crisco: Yes, there were gifts of the Spirit after AD70 (2016)”
God equipped the Gentiles to share in Israel’s hope, Israel’s promises, Israel’s New Heaven and Earth, Israel’s New Jerusalem, and Israel’s greater tabernacle. Continue reading “Max King: Marriage and Resurrection (2005)”
It is this transition period that the rabbis discussed frequently in their Messianic debates. They labeled that period “the days of the Messiah.” Continue reading “Ed Stevens: A Forty Year Millennium? (2003)”
“the church” (Gk. “ekkleisia”) has no clear textual support in terms of its perpetuation as an entity for time indefinite, beyond the First Century era (pre-70 AD in particular). Continue reading “John McPherson: Full Preterism and The Church (2003)”
What would be the point of Paul mentioning a restriction on the observance if there really were to be no restriction at all? Continue reading “Walt Hibbard: A Closer Look at the Phrase ”Until He Shall Come” (2003)”
the end of the age, the revelation or day of Christ, the full-grown man, the coming of the perfect, seeing “face to face,” the redemption of the purchased possession, receiving the inheritance, and the unity of the faith are all equivalents in time and meaning having occurred in 70 A.D. with the fall of Jerusalem.
The HyP teaching that the New Covenant wasn’t in its full establishment until long after the cross event shows how Hyper Preterism is fundamentally different from Christianity as it has always been known.
Full Preterism must either submit to the idea that the law is still in existence for everyone who is not in Christ, or submit to Universalist interpretations.
Full Preterists, in order to maintain the integrity of their hermeneutic, choose to take the timeline-based answer (it is new) over the non timeline-based answer with which they also agree (it is not new). However, it is a plain contradiction to have something new that is eternal.
“To sum the whole into a sentence — with the fall of Jerusalem, the then existing age was ended, the dead were judged, the saints were raised to heaven, and a new dispensation of a world-wide order instituted, of which Christ is everlasting King, and ever present with His people, whether living here or dead beyond.”
. Christ Himself came to dwell in us in A.D. 70 in fulfillment of all the “signs” and of all the fleshly ordinances. (including “the Lord’s Supper”) He Himself is now our Bread (flesh) and Wine (blood). The New Covenant is a covenant of substance and fulfillment, not a covenant of more “signs.”
He further shows that many did not enter the typical rest (promised land) because of unbelief or apostasy, thereby exhorting the believers to remain faithful lest they fall after the same example of unbelief. That generation was a “wilderness” period for the church (30 to 70 AD). Now we have entered His rest and inherited the kingdom of God, New Jerusalem since 70 AD.
We no longer live in expectation. We therefore should no longer pray, your kingdom come