Welcome, Guest
Username Password: Remember me

Preterist and CI-anyone?
(1 viewing) (1) Guest
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2

TOPIC: Preterist and CI-anyone?

Preterist and CI-anyone? 1 year, 11 months ago #3938

  • Mcgragor
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 57
  • Karma: 0
Hello,

I'm new, so let me first say I am studying CI and I am not completely convinced (many things I feel are squeezed just a tad to much to fit this belief), but I am very sympathetic to the view and believe (most) who are holding to this are truly using scripture and are not just running from God so to speak.

I'm Reformed and consider myself at least a Partial Preterist when it comes to Eschatology. I'm assuming most know the Preterist position, but if not, here is the best representation in video form that really got me on board-Keep in mind this guy is a Full Preterist, so there are some things I am not sure about, but for the most part, this is an excellent introduction.

youtu.be/jaqaGGRg9Yw

I only put this here because I think a proper view on Matthew 24 and what happened in AD 70 and who the book of Revelation was written to (and for) actually adds a whole lot of merit to the CI view and wanted to see if others are seeing the same thing. Thanks

Re: Preterist and CI-anyone? 1 year, 11 months ago #3939

  • Timothew
  • OFFLINE
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 228
  • Karma: 15
Mcgragor wrote:
Hello,

I'm new, so let me first say I am studying CI and I am not completely convinced (many things I feel are squeezed just a tad to much to fit this belief...


That statement seems a little bit odd to me, I'm sorry.

When I hear the defenses of Eternal Conscious Torment, the proof-texts are squeezed, twisted, and changed to fit the cherished doctrine. When I hear Biblical Defense of CI, on the other hand, it is like a breath of fresh air. The scriptures are laid out and they state the CI doctrine exactly.

The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
What is the wages of sin? Death. What is the ECTist response? Death doesn't really mean death.

Whosover believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Who receives eternal life? Those who believe in him. What happens if they reject him? They perish.
It is simple and straightforward, but what it the ECTist response? Perish doesn't really mean perish. Twist and Squeeze the scriptures to support the ECTist Dogma.

The soul who sins shall die. Ezekiel 18:4
This is clearly stated, and directly states what Conditionalists believe. What do ECTists say? The soul cannot die, directly contradicting what the Bible says.

The wicked will perish, the wicked will be no more. This directly states what Conditionalists believe. But the ECTists ignore these verses completely.

Read Psalm 92:6-7
The stupid man cannot know;
the fool cannot understand this:
that though the wicked sprout like grass
and all evildoers flourish,
they are doomed to destruction forever;

This shows what God thinks of those who deny that the wicked are doomed to destruction. God's word says that they are "stupid" and "fools". They cannot know and they cannot understand that evildoers are doomed to destruction forever. I'm not the one saying that they are stupid fools, either. I'm just reporting what God says about them.
Τιμοθέῳ γνησίῳ τέκνῳ ἐν πίστει
Tim Wiesner

Re: Preterist and CI-anyone? 1 year, 11 months ago #3941

  • Singalphile
  • OFFLINE
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 237
  • Karma: 12
I think I can see how preterism, especially full preterism, could affect a person's opinion about hell, very broadly speaking, but I don't see how any version of preterism would incline one towards CI.

In other words, preterism might remove some passages from the "about hell" column, but I don't see how any form of preterism would move any passage into the "supports CI" column.

Be curious to know what connection you find. (I haven't watched the video, but I'm generally familiar with all the different opinions about eschatology.)
"Singalphile" - Name chosen (hastily) to indicate being on a narrow path, pursuing the love of God. Male, upper-30's, USA.

Re: Preterist and CI-anyone? 1 year, 11 months ago #3943

  • Timothew
  • OFFLINE
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 228
  • Karma: 15
Mcgragor wrote:
I opened with that statement just to let you know my position, but would rather save that debate for another thread.


I started another thread on that topic. See "Squeezing Scripture?"
Τιμοθέῳ γνησίῳ τέκνῳ ἐν πίστει
Tim Wiesner
Last Edit: 1 year, 11 months ago by Timothew.

Re: Preterist and CI-anyone? 1 year, 11 months ago #3944

  • Mcgragor
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 57
  • Karma: 0
Singalphile,

Thanks for the response. I probably should have went into more detail so I could explain my point better.

When I became a Partial Preterist it was because I concluded to believe what the scriptures actually teach regardless of tradition. So I guess that is the first point in that both the Preterist and CI's start with that framework.

That of course can be used of any doctrine. The main point here is that the basic hermeneutic is the same when it comes to Parables or Apocalyptic language being interpreted in light of the more literal language instead of vice versa and that the CI view relies heavily on Jewish thought from the OT considering such judgement passages and so forth.

I would strongly encourage you to watch the video-its actually very entertaining-I think they spent over a year putting it together. When I first started to study CI I was inclined to do so because what I had already learned from my views on AD 70 and the interpretive methods used to come to that view.

So regardless of apocalyptic language we can't always understand, when Jesus said "this generation shall not pass until all these things take place", then it happened just as he said. When one studies the events of AD 70 it all starts to fall into place.

So in a clear verse if perish means perish and death means death, but in an apocalyptic verse or parable we see things that don't seem to match up, we should always take the clear meaning first. This isn't to say that by other reasoning the ECT position may still have enough to hold its ground, its just to say things begin to make a lot more sense when we put them in their proper order.

So, considering the Preterist (or at least the Partial view), when Jesus told Caiaphas that he would see him coming in the clouds, Caiaphas didn't really think he would literally see Jesus as much as Caiaphas knew Jesus was alluding to the "coming in the cloud" judgment passages of the OT making himself out to be God.

So in the same way if "smoke going up forever" is used in the OT as a symbolism we should not change that symbolism in the NT, as we should read it as the Jews would of read and understood it. Doesn't mean the symbolism can't support ECT, but then again it may in fact not support it.

Okay, I've rambled on enough-watch the video, its very good.

Re: Preterist and CI-anyone? 1 year, 11 months ago #3946

  • Singalphile
  • OFFLINE
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 237
  • Karma: 12
So, you're not saying that CI and preterism are theologically related, but you're saying that they both rely in part on a similar interpretative method, at least for you.

I think I can understand, although I don't think it's the case for me. I don't disagree with anything your wrote, but for me, I can't say that I see any sort of connection in my conclusions.

I might check out the video sometime, but I admit I have a pretty short attention span when it comes to that topic.

Thanks, though.
"Singalphile" - Name chosen (hastily) to indicate being on a narrow path, pursuing the love of God. Male, upper-30's, USA.
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2
Time to create page: 0.85 seconds
Featured audio: Dr. Al Mohler & Chris Date debate
"Should Christians rethink Hell?" on Unbelievable?