As comedian Bill Cosby said, “what’s a cubit?”
OK, I give up, what’s “preterist”? I’ve read both books, but I don’t know this “preterist”
not to mention partial preterist.
There are two principal schools of preterist thought. They are commonly called
partial preterism and
full preterism. Preterists disagree significantly about the exact meaning of the terms used to denote these divisions of preterist thought.
Some partial preterists prefer to call their position
orthodox preterism, thus contrasting their agreement with the creeds of the Ecumenical Councils with what they perceive to be the full preterists’ rejection of the same. This, in effect, makes full preterism unorthodox in the eyes of partial preterists and gives rise to the claim by some that full preterism is heretical.
Partial preterism is also sometimes called
orthodox preterism,
classical preterism or
moderate preterism.
On the other hand, some full preterists prefer to call their position consistent preterism, reflecting their extension of preterism to
all biblical prophecy and thus claiming an inconsistency in the partial preterist hermeneutic.
Sub-variants of preterism include one form of partial preterism which places fulfillment of some eschatological passages in the first three centuries of the current era, culminating in the fall of Rome.
In addition, certain statements from classical theological liberalism are easily mistaken for preterism, as they hold that the biblical record accurately reflects Jesus’ and the Apostles’ belief that all prophecy was to be fulfilled within their generation. Theological liberalism generally regards these apocalyptic expectations as being mistaken, so this view cannot accurately be considered a form of preterism.
