Full Preterism Could Have Changed The World?

[Michelle]

...
The reason is the fascination I have with people who willingly set aside logic and common sense in order to keep from having to admit simple things like the fact that a person's worldview will influence what they do in life. I'm frankly shocked that anyone is arguing that.

See, the thing is that this is EXACTLY what I believe; I would never argue against this.

I see (in the case of Nazi Germany) that racism and nationalism influenced a whole country. That Hitler, a lapsed catholic, used Lutheran antisemitism to further his goals does not necessarily mean that he bought into any of Luther's teaching. It's not like the Third Reich turned propaganda into an art form or anything...

I see (in the case of the formation of the state of Israel) that a desire to maintain access to the sub-continent and the instability of the Ottoman Empire influenced British politicians. I don't argue that certain christians having pretribulation/premillennial views ALSO pressed for the founding of Israel, however.

In the case of the constant unrest in the region...well, oil, radical jihadism, oil, tribalism, oil, I don't really get the Dispensational tie-in there.

Say...what about the Ukraine/Russia mess? You know, Dispensationalists believe Gog or Magog (I can never remember which) speaks of Russia. Maybe, if we hadn't been so clouded by Dispensationalism during the Cold War, we would have done away with Soviet Russia, and Putin wouldn't be so hellbent on restoring it.

The only response to the OP that would make sense to me is one that argues that Full Preterism, because of some element of it, would result in a worse world than the one that the Dispensationalists (or Amillennialists, etc.) have brought us.

Well, the OP asked us not to denounce Full Preterism, so there's that...

Then, we could debate what part of which system would result in a better outcome. To argue that a person's or society's beliefs don't result in any particular outcome at all is laughable.

Maybe we could just talk about how everyone is a sinner in need of grace and how THAT system has the best outcome for everyone.

[robbyyoung]

I agree with you (which I realize makes me flat wrong in Doug's eyes.) Trying to imagine how history might have been different *if only...* is a fool's errand. It is also silly to lay complete blame (or credit) for complex events at the feet of those avowing a certain theological construct. But people do that all the time, so it's not surprising that Doug and Robby are passionate about what they see as tragedies brought about by grievous error. No wonder Full Preterists are so strident in trying to convince others that their understanding of TRUTH. They need to save the world from further misguided tragedies. They must, after all, since God is finished with us.

Hi Michelle,

You said, "They must, after all, since God is finished with us." Where did you get this idea? Who told you God is finished with us? This IS NOT what FP is.

You said, "They need to save the world from further misguided tragedies." And YOU don't? What does this comment prove? Or is this another Futurist mindset of NOT TO GET TO INVOLVED in this world, for Jesus is coming to whisk me away!

You said, "It is also silly to lay complete blame (or credit) for complex events at the feet of those avowing a certain theological construct." Hmmm..., like the Roman and Jewish war? You know, the part where the Jews rejected The New Covenant and as a COMPLETE NATION was destroyed BY GOD HIMSELF because of "avowing a certain theological construct"! Yeah, that was silly of God, wasn't it?

You said, "Trying to imagine how history might have been different *if only...* is a fool's errand." Wisdom can be gained. It's not foolish.

I had a little fun with this response .

God Bless.

[robbyyoung]

Well, the OP asked us not to denounce Full Preterism, so there's that...

Hi Michelle,

I said no such thing! I said "other than denouncing" which I fully expected to happen, your participation is welcomed.

God Bless.

[robbyyoung]

I have never objected to full-preterists presenting or defending their views—here or anywhere else. I have observed, though, that the doctrine seems to be a hobbyhorse, given emphasis out of proportion to its practical value, by those who have embraced it. Doug, a full-preterist, has done a good job of spreading his interests out among various subjects addressed in the forum, but most full-prets that I know do seem obsessed with that one doctrine.

If you think that I am also obsessed with one particular doctrinal hobbyhorse, I would be willing to hear what you think it may be, and how you have arrived at this assessment of my ministry. Eschatology is one of my least-favorite theological topics, though I address myself to it when asked. I think you will find, throughout this forum, my interest in a wide-ranging variety of topics.

Hi Steve,

I reject the use of the term obsessed. Either against FP or other views. Questions ARE NOT answered in a vacuum. I could easily say you are obsessed in avoiding eschatology! You see how that works? Why use inflammatory words in order to "so-call" refute a position? If the Word of God can't make the case, there's a problem. Also, if eschatology isn't on the minds of Christians, these discussions would be void of replies. I like to keep the conversation going, for it does affect how people live their lives, maybe NOT yours, but you are not the only one in the room.

I am NOT going to stop giving answers to questions that conflate with Preterism. No one else's paradigm is subjected to this attention. For whatever reason, Preterism stimulates more questions and before you know it, another thread is created to explain something. But that's a hobbyhorse (in a negative sense to some). Well opinions are just that, "opinions".

Hmmm..., I see another thread coming .

Lighten-up Steve, you know I'm not against you. God Bless

Hey, aren't we off topic !

[Michelle]

You said, "They must, after all, since God is finished with us." Where did you get this idea? Who told you God is finished with us? This IS NOT what FP is.

I think I got the idea from you. I guess I misunderstood. What is God doing, according to Full Preterism? I thought you believed he was just watching. You did say somewhere that He tabernacles with us, but I don't know what that means. Maybe you could enlighten me on these matters??

You said, "They need to save the world from further misguided tragedies." And YOU don't? What does this comment prove? Or is this another Futurist mindset of NOT TO GET TO INVOLVED in this world, for Jesus is coming to whisk me away!

It was a snarky comment on my part (and I apologize for my sarcasm) because the idea that eschatological views are the main motivator for major historical events is ludicrous in my opinion. Of course I get involved, not because I think Jesus is coming to whisk me away (which I don't really believe) but because of how He taught us to live: with love, peace, justice, compassion, hospitality, concern for the poor and the oppressed, etc.

You said, "It is also silly to lay complete blame (or credit) for complex events at the feet of those avowing a certain theological construct." Hmmm..., like the Roman and Jewish war? You know, the part where the Jews rejected The New Covenant and as a COMPLETE NATION was destroyed BY GOD HIMSELF because of "avowing a certain theological construct"! Yeah, that was silly of God, wasn't it?

I...what...how...you...this is...really??

You said, "Trying to imagine how history might have been different *if only...* is a fool's errand." Wisdom can be gained. It's not foolish.

Gaining wisdom is a worthwhile pursuit; I salute you in your endeavor.

I had a little fun with this response .

Same here

God Bless.

He does!

[Michelle]

Well, the OP asked us not to denounce Full Preterism, so there's that...

Hi Michelle,

I said no such thing! I said "other than denouncing" which I fully expected to happen, your participation is welcomed.

God Bless.

I don't get it.

[thrombomodulin]

Read, "The Jews and Their Lies". In it, Luther documents how the Jews were rejected by God specifically because of the events of 70AD. Unfortunately, because he does not see that as the exhaustion of the punishment that was due the Jews according to the New Testament, Luther continues to be antagonistic to them. The Lutheran church continued this basic approach moving forward.

The topic of how a futurist views the Jews is not something I have ever taken time to learn about. As a newcomer to this topic, I would like to ask a beginner level question: I attend a local church that holds strongly to the futurist, dispensational eschatology. Their view of Jewish people is exactly the opposite of Luther's. They have a special love the Jews over others, because they believe the Jews continue to be God's chosen people over the gentiles. I am wondering how it can be that some futurists, like the dispensationalists, are arriving at an apparently opposite perspectives on the Jews as others (e.g. Luther)? Would I be misunderstanding to think that the question of futurism in and of itself doesn't impact whether one might have a special love for, or hatred of, the Jewish people?

[steve7150]

You are flat wrong. It is widely understood by historians that the German people's generic dislike of Jews was heavily influence by Luther and the Lutheran church, which was the state church at the time. Read, "The Jews and Their Lies". In it, Luther documents how the Jews were rejected by God specifically because of the events of 70AD. Unfortunately, because he does not see that as the exhaustion of the punishment that was due the Jews according to the New Testament, Luther continues to be antagonistic to them. The Lutheran church continued this basic approach moving forward. Hitler did not implement a hidden, secret plan. He bragged about his plan at rallies and the Germans ate it up. Your understanding of the founding of the modern state of Israel is incorrect as well. Premillennialists (generally Dispensationalists) in the U.S. and British governments as well as missionaries espousing the same view were instrumental in the creation of Israel. That's bad eschatology creating bad policy. There are numerous books on Christian Zionism and the history of modern Israel, but I found "Faith, Power, and Fantasy" to be a decent introduction (though it's a bit biased towards the Zionist view.






Doug,
You stating that i'm flat wrong simply means in your opinion i'm flat wrong. Yes we all know what Luther said hundreds of years before Hitler. Despite what Luther said Jews lived in Germany for hundreds of years afterwards. In fact initially Hitler called a strike against Jewish businesses and it didn't stick so what he did was gradually build up German nationalism over the next three years until he gained absolute power. Luther never talked about gays,disabled folks,many various ethnic groups, unions, communists and numerous other groups who also ended up in concentration camps, but they did because Hitler was a fanatical racist and nationalist.
Again what you referenced about the founding of Israel was way late in the game well after nationalistic Jewish people started buying land in what was then Palestine in the 1870s in anticipation and hope of a new Israel.

[steve7150]

Would I be misunderstanding to think that the question of futurism in and of itself doesn't impact whether one might have a special love for, or hatred of, the Jewish people?

User avatar
thrombomodulin

Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:59 am

It really should not have any impact but practically speaking dispensationalists see Israel as the key to Christ's victorious return. So since Israel is the home of Jewish people they see all of these players in the mideast as a theatrical performance being played out before our eyes. They see the pages of the bible being played out in the final days at least in their opinion. So they may see the Jews as the good guys in this performance since they would be the instrument for the second coming.

[TheEditor]

Robby,

It would seem you can't have it both ways, either Futurist theology has a "mindset of NOT TO GET TO INVOLVED in this world, for Jesus is coming to whisk me away" or, it has "changed the course of history". Which is it?

Also, I tend to think the notion that the Chrisitians in 70 AD hopped the cosmic train wouldn't be any more convincing to atheists and agnostics than the testimony about the resurrection. Its immaterial.

As far as the Jews, I thought Luther was a Historicist when it came to Revelation. But maybe I'm wrong. I thought the Lutheran church was anyway.

No one else's paradigm is subjected to this attention. For whatever reason, Preterism stimulates more questions and before you know it, another thread is created to explain something.

Really Robby? Have you seen the number of threads on trinitarianism? Try being on my side of the fence on that one. Or the threads on UR? Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

Regards, Brenden.