Author Topic: Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?  (Read 1115 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

omantodd2000

  • Guest
Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?
« on: December 22, 2012, 10:14:30 AM »
I am currently looking for more information on these two views about the book of revelations. If anyone has any books or websites they can recommend I would really appreciate it. I have a found a few books on the Historicism view written by John Thomas but almost nothing as far as a verse by verse explanation about preterist views. As well if you have any personal views as to why you believe one over the other I would like to hear that as well. Thanks

Offline Paul L

  • Est
  • *
  • Posts: 259
  • Gender: Male
Re: Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?
« Reply #1 on: December 22, 2012, 03:12:24 PM »
I am currently looking for more information on these two views about the book of revelations. If anyone has any books or websites they can recommend I would really appreciate it. I have a found a few books on the Historicism view written by John Thomas but almost nothing as far as a verse by verse explanation about preterist views. As well if you have any personal views as to why you believe one over the other I would like to hear that as well. Thanks

Type "Preterism" into any search engine. Wiki-Pedia has an excellent commentary concerning the dogma itself. The basic overview being that Revelation has been completely fulfilled by events leading up to the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 AD & Christ having returned for his 2nd coming soon thereafter. This is the official teaching of the Catholic Church today. A few other Christian denominations have adopted this same view, while others within the Evangelical Protestant mainstream have graduated into partial-Preterism, a mixing of Preterism with Dispensationalism.

Wiki-Pedia also has an excellent discussion on Dispensationalism, it's well worth reading.

I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean by "a verse by verse explanation about preterist views". Do you mean "verse by verse" as can be found written in the Bible?


Offline ded2daworld

  • Silver
  • *
  • Posts: 2099
  • Gender: Male
  • What if today we were just grateful for everything
Re: Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?
« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2012, 04:26:01 PM »
I think oman means "verse by verse" to refer to the scripture verses that preterists use such as:
"I'm telling you that there are some standing here right now that will not die before the fulfillment of all these things"
"Why do so many people think that the Bible is only inspired at certain points -  and that  THEY are inspired to pick out which points?"

Offline Molly

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 11305
Re: Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?
« Reply #3 on: December 22, 2012, 04:40:49 PM »
Does Matthew 16:28 teach the kingdom already came on earth and it has been here all along?

V.27-28 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

First it says they will see the Son of man coming in his kingdom before they died. They did. The next chapter continues:

Matt 17:1 Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother, led them up on a high mountain by themselves."

In Mark 9:1-10: And He said to them, "Assuredly, I say to you that there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom of God present with power." Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John, and led them up on a high mountain apart by themselves; and He was transfigured before them.

Also Luke 9:27-37: "But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the kingdom of God." Now it came to pass, about eight days after these sayings, that He took Peter, John, and James and went up on the mountain to pray".

So how did they see this? They saw the glory of His kingdom on the Mt. of Transfiguration. Two accounts Matthew and Mark say 6 day's, but Luke says 8 day's. Jesus often spoke of something that was important more than once- that is why we have recorded 8 days and also 6 days for the same event, he said it more than once.

Mk.9:2 "He was transfigured before them- the light came from within him not from without showing the glory that was hidden from them since his birth. This is why Jesus is called "the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person" (Heb 1:3) he forever is "the Lord of glory" (1 Cor .2:8). When John sees Jesus in heaven he is enthroned, and seen in his glory revealed. Rev 1:16 "His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength.

While Jesus is PRAYING he is transfigured; and Moses and Elijah both appear in glory (Lk.9). Matthew states Jesus' face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light, Mark reports He was transfigured that his clothes became shining, exceedingly white, like snow, such as no launderer on earth can whiten them . Luke says the appearance of His face was altered, and His robe became white and glistening. His glory showed through his human nature, even his clothes.

Mt.17 "While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!" If they were not there for his baptism when God spoke from heaven and the Spirit came upon him like a dove, they were here experiencing something more spectacular. Just as a cloud covered the mountain and the glory of the LORD rested on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days (Exod. 24:15-18) Moses once again is on a Mountain engulfed in the cloud and hearing God's voice from heaven. This too is called a holy mountain by Peter.

The presence of Moses and Elijah are associated with the kingdom, they were expected by the Jewish people to return at the end of the age with the Messiah. This is why Peter wanted to build them tabernacles. He thought the kingdom had arrived with their being present and seeing Jesus glorified.

The three closest disciples were given a preview of what it would be like in the kingdom, this is how Peter describes it in 2 Pt. 1:16-18 " For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming (parousia) of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honor and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with him on the Holy mountain."

Jesus said previously, some would not die until they see the coming of the kingdom in power." They did even though it was temporary.

Jesus needs to return to establish the kingdom on earth permanently. This encompasses His physical return with angels and glory that will be seen by all.

Mark 8:38 when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels."

Mt16:27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done" (Mt.25)

Mark 13:24-27: V.24 "But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; (this is describing the tribulation period commencing Rev.6:12, Joel 2:10,31).

v.26 "Then they will see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory."And then He will send His angels, and gather together His elect from the four winds"

So we have Jesus coming back to earth in glory, with angels to have his kingdom in power on earth.

No doubt John had this event in mind along with witnessing his whole life. "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth."(John 1:14)

http://www.letusreason.org/Biblexp56.htm

Offline micah7:9

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 5959
  • Gender: Male
  • Mic 7:8 Thou dost not rejoice over me, O mine ene
Re: Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?
« Reply #4 on: December 22, 2012, 05:21:44 PM »
This may or may not be worth the thought. But the 3 chosen by Jesus that time on the mountain for me are significant.
Peter....a piece of rock
James.....Jacob..heel catcher
John......Jehovah favored
Mic 7:8  Thou dost not rejoice over me, O mine enemy, When I have fallen, I have risen, When I sit in darkness Jehovah is a light to me.

Offline ded2daworld

  • Silver
  • *
  • Posts: 2099
  • Gender: Male
  • What if today we were just grateful for everything
Re: Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?
« Reply #5 on: December 22, 2012, 07:53:19 PM »
John did say he was Jesus' favorite
Peter was a chip off the old block?
James -Jacob the grabber because he wouldn't have been there
except Jesus loved his brother John so much. How embarrassing. "Come follow me" - oh not you james, I meant just your brother John
"Why do so many people think that the Bible is only inspired at certain points -  and that  THEY are inspired to pick out which points?"

Offline sheila

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 3825
Re: Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?
« Reply #6 on: December 23, 2012, 12:21:14 AM »
mOLLY, last week something came to me on that...it was moses speaking face to face on the mountain with

  the Lord when the law was given..here moses is speaking face to face with the Lord on mt of transfiguration.

 another thing..when Elijah went to the Mount..and the Lord asked what are you doing here Elijah?

 then Elijah went out to speak with the Lord after hearing the still small voice[both of these  men spoke

 with the Lord on the mountain ] 

omantodd2000

  • Guest
Re: Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?
« Reply #7 on: December 23, 2012, 04:23:59 AM »
Molly, thanks for that, I have for years believed something similar to what you posted here but recently read a preterist view of these events and was a little swayed to their point of view. Many of the things I read made allot of sense so I am looking for more information.  here is a little of what I was reading if anyone else is interested in studying this.

"Thy kingdom come" Christ said," I tell you there be
some standing here that shall not taste of death till they have
seen the kingdom of God come with power." Mark 9: 1.
Again, "And the Pharisees demanded when the kingdom of
God should come, and he answered, The kingdom of God
cometh not with observation: for behold the kingdom of God
is within you." Luke 17 : 20. Here it is established on the
earth. Again, the kingdom of heaven is said to contain
things that offend. "He shall gather out of his kingdom all
things that offend, and them that do iniquity." Matt. 13:
41. Is there anything in the Paradise of God that offends?
Again, it is said, there are unworthy persons in the kingdom
of God. "The publicans and harlots go into the kingdom of
God before you." Matt. 21: 31. Again, it is said, "The
kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the children of the
kingdom shall be thrust out." Matt. 8:12. But can this be
said of the kingdom above? Again, the kingdom of heaven
is susceptible of growth and progress. It is compared to a
grain of mustard seed which a man sowed in his field. It is
likened also to leaven which a woman took and hid in three
measures until the whole was leavened." Matt. 13: 31.
These figures illustrate its growth and extension. Again,
'It is likened to a net which was cast into the sea, and gath-
ered fishes of every kind, both good and bad." Matt. 13:
47, 48. But are men to be gathered into the upper world in-
discriminately, both good and bad? The meaning of this fig-
ure is the preaching of the Gospel, it was like casting a net into
the sea it would be received by all classes, but in the hearts
of some it would spring up and bear an abundant harvest,
while in the hearts of others it would fall, as it were, upon
stony ground, and prove unfruitful. Again, the kingdom of
God is "likened unto ten virgins, five of whom were wise and
five were foolish ; they that were foolish took their lamps, but no
oil with them." But is the kingdom of immortal glory com-
posed of foolish virgins? And is that state ever darkened for
the want of oil? These passages show that the phrases
"kingdom of God" and " kingdom of heaven," denote Christ's
spiritual reign, or his visible church on the earth and that
his reign shall end in the consummation of all things, when he
shall deliver up the kingdom to God the Father, who shall be
all in all. 1 Cor. 14: 24.

Offline eaglesway

  • < Moderator >
  • *
  • Posts: 4438
  • Gender: Male
  • Grace & Peace be multiplied unto you, in Jesus
    • Hell is a Myth.com
Re: Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?
« Reply #8 on: December 23, 2012, 05:08:37 AM »
the problem with the preterist/historicist debate, IMO, is that- especially as regards the book of revelation- the whole counsel of God is a blending of the two.

Spiritual truths fulfilled in Christ working themselves out in history- this is the real coin.

The coin has two sides. History and time transcendant spiritual reality, for instance......

Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
(1Pe 1:18-20)

This statement by Peter is laden with revelation. The truth foreseen in prophetic scriptures is often, even usually, a spiritual truth that will CONSUMMATE in a historical event. Even as old testament saints looked forward to the death of Messiah in Isaiah's prophecy and we look back at it. There looking forward was nevertheless filled with relevance for all who had ears to hear. This is a fact that Jesus testified to saying, "Abraham saw my day...."


When we, as Christians, try to SEPARATE the TWO SIDES OF THE COIN, invalidating one by the other and POSING THE SCRIPTURES AS IF THEY ARE DIVIDED, we err severely. It is for this reason that I try to recommend that we listen more closely to one another and not be so quick to totally invalidate other perspectives.

There is a common ground for all, and it leads to a "unity of the faith" that is not "total doctrinal agreement" but is rather a mid-rash that faithfully pursues, "speaking the truth in love" with a desire for union that exceeds the desire to be "on the right side".

By this I do not mean that we want a mushy gushy union of error. I mean that we understand that we have not yet resisted sin to the shedding of our blood and we are not yet in possession of such fruit as to act out like we have "it" and we don't need to listen for adjustments to our views.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2012, 05:16:05 AM by eaglesway »
The Logos is complete, but it is not completely understood. hellisamyth.webs.com

Offline eaglesway

  • < Moderator >
  • *
  • Posts: 4438
  • Gender: Male
  • Grace & Peace be multiplied unto you, in Jesus
    • Hell is a Myth.com
Re: Preterist and Historicism view of revelations?
« Reply #9 on: December 23, 2012, 05:31:27 AM »
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
(Eph 1:3-6)

But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
(2Th 2:13)

God predestined us to adoption as children by Jesus Christ. He chose us fro the beginning. Yet, at the same time He exhorts us, "Today if you hear His voice, harden not your hearts".

Calvinists and Armineans of varying degrees attack one another as if one sdie of scripture is "truer" than the other. The truth is, really, a balance between the two polarizing extremes that requires wisdom, understanding and a desire to "above all preserve the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace."

You can always tell someone who has not received a love for the wisdom of God and is all hung up in their version of "the truth".

They have no tolerance for the views of others. They see no bridges between their "knowledge" of the scriptures and the knowledge of others. They are missing the "deepest truths" the "hidden wisdom" because they do not put a very high value on the "doctrine of the importance of the unity of the body of Christ"- and they show the weakness of their foundation by the disrespect with which they treat others with whom they disagree.
The Logos is complete, but it is not completely understood. hellisamyth.webs.com