The orthodox paradigm rules-out from the start hyper-preterists conclusions. As Wilson writes, “In short, the only eschatological position that the universal church has been able to agree on thus far is that hyper-preterism is wrong” Continue reading “Tyler Hicks: Why No Orthodox Person Should Ever Switch to Hyper-Preterism (2005)”
It is true that the “eschatology” of the New Testament is predominantly preterist. For those unfamiliar with the preterist perspective, it is the ancient view that many of the eschatological passages of the New Testament were fulfilled (completely) in the destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70. This view may sound novel, but in reality there have been orthodox adherents to it throughout church history Continue reading “C. Jonathan Seraiah: The End of All Things – Pantelism Is Heresy (2002)”
Today’s 40 minute podcast examines a statement made by Full Preterist Larry Siegle. Continue reading “Phil Naessens: The Different Gospel of Full Preterism (2009 Audio)”
Partial preterism, if applied consistently to Matthew 24, will result in full preterism which the church has long defined as a heretical view. Continue reading “Samuel Whitefield: Why Partial Preterism Leads to a Full Heresy (2013)”
When approaching the subject of “Hyper-Preterism” it is essential to clarify our terms. There is an important distinction that needs to be made between Partial-Preterism and Hyper-Preterism. Partial-Preterism falls within the realm of Christian Orthodoxy, while Hyper-Preterism is heterodox (outside of Orthodoxy) and therefore a damnable heresy that true Christians cannot believe. Continue reading “Rusty Arizona: What Exactly is Hyper-Preterism? (2014)”
Preterists strive for consistency in their view of Bible prophecy. The goal is admirable. But when a series of propositions is linked and they are grounded on the same faulty foundation, when one of them topples—like dominos in a line—they all fall. Continue reading “Wayne Jackson: The Menace of Radical Preterism (1991)”
Gentry claims to provide “a brief introduction, summary, and critique of the system.” This is something that he truly does not do. Nowhere in the book does he lay out in detail the support for the Full Preterist viewpoint Continue reading “Frank Daniels: Days of Future Passed: You Missed It (2016)”
Paul probably held the widespread notion that the interim stage of the Messianic kingdom would be only of short duration and that, like Aqiba and Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, “he will have reckoned with forty years at most.” Continue reading “Randall Otto: Preterism and the Question of Heresy (2000)”
Eventually I also learned that Preterists don’t support Israel because they do not see the Jews as God’s chosen people.
In an effort to deal with the question of Preterism and orthodoxy, this paper is intended to give special attention to the outworking of our Lord Jesus Christ’s majesty.
Continue reading “Vince Krivda: Christ the King and Preterism (2012)”
The 1,943 years represent the time that exists between 58 AD, around the time when Paul stopped witnessing to the Jews, because of their hard core unbelief, and taught the Gentiles exclusively, until his martyrdom; and 2001 AD.
I try not to cloud my readers’ minds with the twaddle that seems to be everywhere today especially in the halls of academia. The subject of ‘Preterism’ seems to be enjoying a revival of some sort today.
I think the preterist looks at prophecy much in the same way as the flat-earthers consider a round earth.
One of the great dangers in this heresy is the fact that Christians usually don’t take it seriously when they first hear of this doctrine because of its obvious false premise.