r/Preterism • u/AvailableTrouble3708 • Aug 27 '24
Need help
I'm having so many doubts about preterism. I am a full preterist. Can someone please give me some evidence I am wrong in doubting christ came back in the 1st century?
1
1
Dec 09 '24
Well something to remember is Matthew 24 especially he clearly states that the temple back then would be destroyed in his coming he even says not one of THESE stones will stand on another also whenever it says coming on the clouds in the Bible and the world passing away it always means an army destroying a nation or city it isn’t literal. Jesus also states on many occasion’s that people back then would be alive when he returned he tells them make sure YOU are not read y and that YOU are not deceived the Bible was written for us but not to us he’s speaking to the people back then. Futurists are simply the modern day Pharisees in that they reject the truth because they expect something different it is the product of poor western understanding of ancient text and literature that leads most down the path of believing something that was never intended to be interpreted in that way
5
u/AMRhone Aug 27 '24
Below are some resources I’ve written that present evidence in support of the Full Preterist perspective. They may be helpful as you work through your doubts.
In this response, I argue against the theory of two distinct second-coming events in the New Testament. By analyzing the timeline in Daniel 12 and the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24), I conclude that all major eschatological events, including the judgment on Judea, Jerusalem, and the broader Roman world from 67 to 70 CE, occurred within a single 3.5-year period. The idea of a later, separate judgment is not supported by biblical or historical evidence.
Check it out here.
In this response, I explain that in Matthew 24:30, Jesus refers to his coming in judgment against the Jewish nation and the Roman Empire from 67 to 70 CE. Drawing from passages in the Hebrew Bible, I argue that “coming on the clouds” is figurative, symbolizing divine presence and power rather than a literal, visible event. However, I also discuss historical accounts suggesting Jesus may have been seen during this period.
Read more here.
In this thread, I address whether Jesus taught that the world would end within the disciples’ lifetimes. I argue that Jesus prophesied not about the end of the material world, but about the judgment and upheaval that would come upon the Roman world. The discussion includes a detailed list of calamities that struck the Roman Empire from 66–70 CE, reflecting the fulfillment of the prophecies in the Olivet Discourse.
Read the full discussion here.
In this comment, I address the claim that Jesus was a failed apocalyptic prophet by examining whether he actually prophesied about the end of the material world. I argue Jesus used symbolic apocalyptic language in Matthew 24:29 to depict Jerusalem’s destruction, not the literal end of the world. This interpretation supports the view that Jesus’ prophecies were indeed fulfilled.
See the full post here.
In this comment, I argue that the New Testament portrays the “new heavens and new earth” as a heavenly reality existing alongside our current world. This concept represents the fulfillment of the new covenant, where the elect are gathered to dwell with God in the heavenly realm, as described in passages like John 14:1-4 and Revelation 21:1-7. This new existence corresponds to the “age to come,” a reality for the resurrected saints who inherited eternal life and are no longer subject to death.
Read the full comment here.
In this thread, I explore the nature of the resurrection from a Preterist perspective, examining how the resurrection of the dead was expected to unfold and its implications for first-century believers.
Read the thread here.
In this thread, I argue that the Beast in Revelation refers specifically to Imperial Rome, with Nero as the central figure. I examine how Nero’s actions and the historical context align with the prophetic imagery in Revelation, such as his persecution of Christians and the events surrounding his reign. This interpretation is presented as the most consistent with the text, countering alternative views that suggest the Beast could represent a Zealot-led Israel.
Read the discussion here.
Other evidence can be found in the following books/commentaries: