Full Preterism Could Have Changed The World?

[Michelle]

Thank you, robbyyoung and Doug, for sharing your thoughts about the flow of history. They were interesting thoughts, that's for sure.

Robbyyoung, would you expound about the present, as well? Tell me how Full Preterists are being better stewards of your societies, the planet and future endeavors. I don't really associate with any Full Preterists, so I'm pretty unaware of the work they are doing in these areas.

Also, you said this about The Editor: "You my friend, amongst others, hold to this climatic end of all things." I have two questions:

• 1.) How do you know what his eschatology is?
  2.) Did you mean climatic, as in drastic, world ending climate change or was it a typo and you meant ...climactic end of all things?

Thanks,
Michelle

[TheEditor]

Hi Robby and Doug,

I think you may have misunderstood my meaning on "humorous". It wasn't a jab at entertaining the question. We all need to entertain questions in order to think. Rather, I was a bit bemused that some may think whole societies have framed political decisions based on an eschatological paradigm. That said I would say, Robby, that your selected quote from Mr. Hitler is more well suited for the other thread on Pacifism; I can see where believing that you are doing the Lord's work by fighting for your country might be problematic. I am not certain exactly how realized eschatology is going to effect people who are bent on either doing right or doing wrong.

Also, are you suggesting that if one thinks at some point in the future there is going to be a manifestation of Christ in the heavens (whether that is in 20, 50 or 500 years) that somehow that is going to effect the decision to invade countries and drop bombs?

Doug, the short answer to your question would be "sort of". I believe that if a person truly wants to be a disciple, they are going to focus on the things that being a disciple means. I know plenty of Dispensationalists that help charities. I know plenty of Arians that so the same. I know plenty of Charismatics that do as well. I choose these because they may be less mainstream for this forum's mindset. The views regarding the manner of the Lord's return (or lack thereof) should and will be ancillary to a person's walk with God. If they are the focal point of one's walk, then I doubt whether there really is a walk at all. Please reread that sentence.

Chrisitanity is not about any of these matters, so if they are taking center-stage, then there's trouble in River City.

Regards, Brenden.

[steve]

The views regarding the manner of the Lord's return (or lack thereof) should and will be ancillary to a person's walk with God.

I wonder whether most full-preterists agree with this statement. I certainly do. Perhaps some of them do as well. It does seem that most of the people I know who buy into that system end up playing a one-stringed instrument, and give the impression that convincing others of this view is very important (reminding me of the attitudes of many Calvinists toward Calvinism). If I were to adopt any kind of hobbyhorse, I would certainly choose one that had impact on the matter of Christian discipleship (though I would prefer, even more, to avoid hobbyhorses altoghter). I personally can't see any practical ramifications of switching to full-preterism—though it seems to me to tend toward a certain Docetic rejection of the importance of the material body and physical planet in terms of God's eternal purposes.

[TheEditor]

Hi Steve,

Interesting question. Below I will paste a post I had written a while back, but never posted it. Since you raised this question it reminded me that I had written it, so I present it as my contribution to your question:

-------------------------------------------

Birds of a feather.

I have often wondered why it is that those who embrace "full preterism" often will become quite obsessed with disabusing everyone of their "other-than-preterist" point of view. Is there something inherent in the teaching that requires converts to become champions of this particular view? Then I started to think about my own exodus from the WT Society. After things became clear to me, I spent a number of years lashing out (in forums similar to this one and in personal conversations) against the WT Society, and, by unfortunate extention, some Jehovah's Witnesses themselves.

After a while, when I "worked through" some of my feelings on the matter, I became more apathetic regarding all things Watchtower.

So, in reflecting on that, I wonder if the same is true of those that go from Pre-Millenialism to Full-Preterism? Is part of the almost militant "zeal of a convert" due to an "I coulda had a V-8" moment? Is the degree of passion generated by a change of mind on the matter commensurate with the passion with which the previous view was held? Or, is it something entirely different?

I can understand a Pre-Millenialist, with an eschatolgy they are convinced will be realized at any moment, being reluctant to conclude that the truth is, it already happened--and 1900 years ago at that. And, there are those that are attracted, not so much by the "good news" but by ancillary matters; accretions and alloys that they find in some way enamoring. So, I am not surprised by the "kick-back" that Pre-Millenialists give to Preterist ideas when presented.

I still though wonder about the converted preterist.

Regards, Brenden.

[dwilkins]

“I was a bit bemused that some may think whole societies have framed political decisions based on an eschatological paradigm”

I don’t know how often you read news papers or notice the impact of Dispensational churches and Zionism, but the current state of Israel is the direct result of a society that framed political decisions based on an eschatological paradigm. There would be no Israel, and Zionism might still be an irrelevant corner of Judaism, if it weren’t for Dispensational eschatology. Thus, there would be a significantly different calculus in the Middle East, where we seem to be constantly sucked into political decisions and war.

“I personally can't see any practical ramifications of switching to full-preterism—though it seems to me to tend toward a certain Docetic rejection of the importance of the material body and physical planet in terms of God's eternal purposes.”

I think you are 180 degrees off in this conclusion. Full Preterists are the only ones who think they are going to have to live on this planet indefinitely (likely millions of years). They have no expectation that our decedents are going to be beamed out or to leave other than through space travel, so they have no interest in ruining this place. Because their energies are spent trying to explain what they think they haven’t spent a great deal of time on the practical side of these issues. But, I’d encourage you to get to know Jerel Kratt and Tim Martin as examples of people who’ve taken practical measures related to their expectation that natural resources are things we should responsibly manage. The Docetic implications are completely missing in my opinion.

Doug

[TheEditor]

Hi Doug,

No, I am fully aware of the effects American Zionists have had on the founding of the modern State of Israel. You may forget I used to be a JW, and The Watchtower's founder CT Russell (though the Organization today is not what he started) was an American Christian Zionist. In fact, there is a book about that subject. Some feel he was partly responsible for encouraging the Rothchilds to purchase land in Palestine through open and private letters. Whatever the case, this is an argument in favor of how some individual Christians may try to influence policies, or activities (much like tree-huggers may influence policies, and I mean no disrespect to them, I can be one myself). But the idea that nation upon nation throughout history has been influenced by Dispensationalism is a bit of a stretch. We could equally blame (and far more so) Amillenialism for emboldening the Catholic Church.

As for "millions of years"; there are any number of cosmic occurences or natural phenomena that could extinguish all of humanity next year, or in ten years, or in a thousand years. If man survives, whatever form that world looks like, I doubt if recycling makes the top ten list of priorities.

Regards, Brenden.

[dwilkins]

Hi Doug,

No, I am fully aware of the effects American Zionists have had on the founding of the modern State of Israel. You may forget I used to be a JW, and The Watchtower's founder CT Russell (though the Organization today is not what he started) was an American Christian Zionist. In fact, there is a book about that subject. Some feel he was partly responsible for encouraging the Rothchilds to purchase land in Palestine through open and private letters. Whatever the case, this is an argument in favor of how some individual Christians may try to influence policies, or activities (much like tree-huggers may influence policies, and I mean no disrespect to them, I can be one myself). But the idea that nation upon nation throughout history has been influenced by Dispensationalism is a bit of a stretch. We could equally blame (and far more so) Amillenialism for emboldening the Catholic Church.

As for "millions of years"; there are any number of cosmic occurences or natural phenomena that could extinguish all of humanity next year, or in ten years, or in a thousand years. If man survives, whatever form that world looks like, I doubt if recycling makes the top ten list of priorities.

Regards, Brenden.

Actually, the Amillennialism of the Catholic church is a great example. They thought their mission was to expand the kingdom, so they did. They are larger than the Protestant church, which has been crashing in influence since Dispenstional theology came into the mainstream. And, it isn't just individuals influencing policy. Politicians have been complaining for at least 40 years about how Dispensationalists through things like the Moral Majority and similar movements have been influencing policy. These are large movements with big influence. Luther's approach to Jews (that they were rejected by God and due for punishment) is recognized by historians to be a significant part of the basis for Nazi ideology. I have a feeling that you are pretending that this just isn't so in order to keep from having to admit that you are flat wrong.

As far as the future of humanity goes, Full Preterism simply says that the future of mankind isn't revealed in scripture. So, it could last for a very long time. If a gamma ray burster hits us tomorrow, then it won't. But, it's not the topic of scripture, so we don't know how long human history will last. Therefore, it behooves people to take care of what they have. You don't have to make fun of recycling just to try to set up a straw man.

Doug

[TheEditor]

Hi Doug,

No need to be touchy about your pet theories. The fact that groups such as the Moral Majority have been involving themselves in politics tells us what, exactly? I didn't know that Dispensationalism (which I don't adhere to, by the way) was an in-Dispensible part of being a Moral Majority member? I must have missed the memo. My point about Amillenialism still stands; that is a decidedly NON-Dispensationalist philosophy that still influeces the way Churches interface with politics.

What exactly is this about, anyway? Are we to cull together all eschatological paradigms, and seperate them; dissect their politcal leanings and involvements, and come up with a "template" of which views color which behaviors? To what purpose? Did you miss my earlier point? The one found in the sentence that I said to "re-read"? to wit; "The views regarding the manner of the Lord's return (or lack thereof) should and will be ancillary to a person's walk with God. If they are the focal point of one's walk, then I doubt whether there really is a walk at all." It seems to me the only "straw man" being errected is by Preterists posting here that are trying to demonstrate the over-arching superiority of their views and how those views go toward making a better planet. Ain't buying it.

Regards, Brenden.

[robbyyoung]

The views regarding the manner of the Lord's return (or lack thereof) should and will be ancillary to a person's walk with God.

I wonder whether most full-preterists agree with this statement. I certainly do. Perhaps some of them do as well. It does seem that most of the people I know who buy into that system end up playing a one-stringed instrument, and give the impression that convincing others of this view is very important (reminding me of the attitudes of many Calvinists toward Calvinism). If I were to adopt any kind of hobbyhorse, I would certainly choose one that had impact on the matter of Christian discipleship (though I would prefer, even more, to avoid hobbyhorses altoghter). I personally can't see any practical ramifications of switching to full-preterism—though it seems to me to tend toward a certain Docetic rejection of the importance of the material body and physical planet in terms of God's eternal purposes.

Hi Steve and Brenden,

What? You may have to clarify this statement (in red). Your walk with God BETTER support THE TRUTH of His Word. I think you guys are unintentionally going against the grain of what Yeshua and The Apostles taught their audience. It was VERY important in The Gospel message to persevere, be steadfast, look for, expect, and hasten unto the coming of The Lord. “One’s walk with God” IS NOT in a vacuum, it is derived from The Gospel. Therefore, the entirety of The Gospel message is PRIMARY and CANNOT be unsupportive to IT’S SELF. What’s secondarily ancillary to the entirety of The Gospel is our response to its message. If this is what you mean, yes I agree.

And what is that message? Is it not the teachings in the New Testament from the mouth of Yeshua and The Apostles. Isn't what we read in that message, without question, an exhortation to preparing one’s self for The Lord’s return!

You minimize any part of The Gospel Message you run afoul to the entirety of The Gospel message.

A tenet in that Gospel message was the promise of The Lord’s return. Yeshua and The Apostles constantly used this as a motivator to their audience to repent and stay the course.

2 Pet 3:1-4, 11-14
1 Thes 4:9-18
Matt 3:7, 10, 12
Matt 16:27
Matt 21:40-41, 43, 45
Rom 8:18
Rom 13:11-12

I could go on and on… So according to The Futurist, this message ISN’T really of primary importance to the Entirety of The Gospel Message? Really? Well Yeshua and The Apostles say’s otherwise. If you’re a Futurist, your message BETTER echo Yeshua’s and The Apostle’s, for every correspondence found in the NT has this tenet! And there are many outspoken Futurists who are and have been doing just that. I simply believe the Futurist timing to be off and alien from Yeshua and The Apostles understanding. Thereofore, if they want to believe they've got it right, so be it. It doesn't make them any less God's child or vice versa.

So this leads us back to our current mindset. Futurism has played and continues to play a roll in policy decisions throughout the world. A rejection to all things fulfilled has given us enormous adverse consequences post 70 A.D. to this present day.

Realized eschatology as it takes hold in the political/governmental arena throughout the world can be a game changer, just as Futurism has played its part. Lastly, the world will always be subject to violence and wicked humans, but as Christ’s Kingdom is realized as consummated, I believe world policies can and will be affected. Such as, our Kingdom stewardship began almost 2000 years ago. Therefore, the Christian mind who sits in a seat of political authority should shift to peace and righteousness amongst all parties and NOT to a biased slant of another for fear of sinning against God’s eschatological agenda.

Also, I don’t know why you guys keep making charges about Preterists being obsessed and disabusing other points of view. I could make the same claim against you. As Christian eschatological views go, the timing of events is the big rub. I don’t think anyone is guilty of denying any component of eschatology.

Why would a Preterist understanding, answer to a, Futurist understanding apart from his own paradigm? And then be charged with being obsessed???? Listen, I have thick-skin, it doesn’t affect me that much to be called or labeled as, “whatever”. These types of comments are a little distracting, but I knew this would happen and the accusations that follow. I think we can all be less disingenuous and stick to the context of scripture, if at all possible, while exchanging ideas.

God Bless.

[robbyyoung]

Thank you, robbyyoung and Doug, for sharing your thoughts about the flow of history. They were interesting thoughts, that's for sure.

Robbyyoung, would you expound about the present, as well? Tell me how Full Preterists are being better stewards of your societies, the planet and future endeavors. I don't really associate with any Full Preterists, so I'm pretty unaware of the work they are doing in these areas.

Also, you said this about The Editor: "You my friend, amongst others, hold to this climatic end of all things." I have two questions:

• 1.) How do you know what his eschatology is?
  2.) Did you mean climatic, as in drastic, world ending climate change or was it a typo and you meant ...climactic end of all things?

Thanks,
Michelle

Hi Michelle,

LOL, yes I meant to say "climactic". Brenden and I, have talked about eschatology before. He is in the Futurists camp as I am not.

God Bless.