I Am Not A Full-Preterist...

Israel is anti christ to they passed an anti missionary law in israel 1977thats more in line with scripture since they wanna third temple to resume sacrafices..killed christ and stilll teach their own from the talmud he is a sorcerrer.the zionist infultrated the "church"for strategic purposes a long timeago.they wanna resume sacrafices in this temple.can you get more anti christ than that.dont believe me?you have a computer at your finger tips go ask a rabbiWAKE UP CHRISTIANS PRETERIST OR NOT!

part 3
as far as partial preterist, I learned not to even bother. It's pretty hard to change someone. Yes all things are possible threw the Lord, I'll comment before anyway says that, but it's not easy. I find it more irritating then anything. I believe in a high percent how someone is raised, its what they believe threw out thier life mostly. I was raised futurist, and became Full preterist around 20, and no looking back, peace

I was a Pre-millenialist before I came to Christ at 20. In fact it was fear of "the apocalypse" and anticipation of "the rapture" that I was saved in the first place. I became Partial Preterist about 4 years later. Within the last year I made the switch to FP but not based on any FP arguments; it was actually due to me combining history and prophecy with PP and a better sense of Messianic Kingdom background from men like NT Wright in NTPG and J&VG.

The reason I mention that I sort of discovered FP on my own was that I thought I was going crazy when I was finding in the Scriptures that the "river of fire" scene in Daniel 7 would take place during the times of the fourth beast and the little horn. A direct contradiction for PP and PM in that the Jews awaited a "judgment day" during the times of the final sea beast from Daniel in which the Messiah would appear and destroy it. So I had to rebuild from there and it all comes to a nice head.

So I'm aware of the PP arguments as I used to defend them. Problem is that the "river of fire" in Daniel 7 isn't at the "end of time", it's during the time of the fourth sea beast, which even PP acknowledges as Rome. So the "river of fire" during Roman rule? And as for the resurrection taking place for all who had died and would live then in Dan 12, it is not at the "end of time" either; it takes place in the days of the Savior. (Heb 9:26) These 2 problems alone upgrade PP to FP, imo.

dude have you ever read any Don K Preston books? Dude is amazing, and has destroyed anybody who has debated, bad to.

I haven't but thanks for the reference! I've never read anything about FP so if you know of any good speakers or writers on it I'd love to hear more about it.

Part 2
Now I don't care if the book of Revelation says after the Second Coming Christ splits the earth into 3. Then I see on the news the earth is still one. I will still agree with the scripture saying it is split in 3. Many well say well look, that hasn't been fulfilled. No to you it hasn't been fulfilled, to me it means something THAT I DONT UNDERSTAND AS A MAN, not that, well it never happened yet. Like you said and I agree, will always be a Full Preterist. As far as partial preterist

Part1
you said I've had those thoughts myself, MrEternal. However, to advocate against FP, I think, is to leave many serious time-sensitive fulfillments incomplete when the prophets said they would be.

I agree 100%, thats why I'm Full Preterist. In fact for me, not being a Full Preterist would make "ME" feel like I'm calling prophets and Christ a liar, GOD FORBID.

Now reading what the prophets, Christ and every other writer wrote in the scriptures, to me, is all 1st century.

I generally hold all preterist "time-statements" fulfilled. Prophecy is too complicated for one to hapazardly lump all prophecy into one event.