ERROR: 30-70AD MILLENNIUM Hyper-Preterism, Full-Preterism, Covenant Eschatology


30-70AD MILLENNIUM  Hyper-Preterism, Full-Preterism, Covenant EschatologyThis view holds that the Millennium (1000 years) of Revelation 20:1-7


It incorporates the following errors:

 Are you not throwing the baby out with the bathwater?
No. I am only throwing out the bathwater. I am only throwing out the theories that have Rev 20:1-10's "Thousand Years" ending around 70AD. I am firmly holding on to "the baby," that is, the realization that: the Nero-Beast Tribulation is history; that Jesus has Returned long ago; the "Day of the Lord/Millennium/Thousand Years" is a past event; the New Heavens, New Earth, and New Jerusalem arrived at old Jerusalam's 70AD departure; the Saints have reigned with Jesus ever since; God's dwelling has been with men ever since and will remain forevermore! Emmanuel, God with us! The Saints have been made heirs of God and co-heirs with Jesus who has received all authority in Heaven and Earth!

There have been many concepts that have come out of Preterism that are disagreeable…
True. we therefore cast aside the entire view?
We only cast aside the theories that do not fit Scripture such as:
I) Theories that posit the ending of Rev 20:1-10's "1000 Years" at 70AD.
A) Resultant theories that posit the beginning of Rev 20:1-10's "1000 Years" prior to writing of 2 Tim 2:18
1) Resultant Hymenaen heresies timing "the first resurrection" of Rev 20:4-6 prior to writing of 2 Tim 2:18
a) Resultant Gnostic-like heresies that make the Resurrection out to be
i) Resultant Universalist-Lawless heresies that add to the Word of God pronouncing:
"Since the blessed & holy martyrs 'came to covenant life' at start of the 1000 years, Rev 20:4,
then the 'rest of the dead come to covenant life' too, at end of the 1000 years, Rev 20:5."
For example you espouse that the Millennium concluded in 1070 yet even though I disagree, I do not cast aside the view of past fulfillment.
Exactly. You have just answered your own question. Even though I reject the theories that posit the ending of Rev 20:1-10's "1000 years" at 70AD, I do not cast aside the view of past fulfillment, either.
So you assert that a 30-70AD Millennium leads to universalism?
I have not merely asserted this, I have proven and documented it. Follow the links in the post to which you responded and you will find ample support for my statements. If you need still more, I am prepared to provide it. For the purpose of keeping this post easy to follow, I have left off the links I am prepared to provide to substantiate my statements here.
Well why can not the same be said about a Millennium ending in 1070?
NO. Because the 70-1070AD Millennium begins AFTER 2 Tim 2:18 was penned, so does the Resurrection of the Saints at Rev 20:4. This means that the Saints' Resurrection was a "coming to life" of their bodies as was the "coming to life" of "the rest of the dead" at Rev 20:5. The righteous are bodily resurrected as are the unrighteous, (albeit at different times). But since the unrighteous had NOT received "eternal/covenant life" in their souls prior to their judgment, (ie. their names were not written into the Lamb's Book of Life prior to their judgment), they are eternally condemned to the Lake of Fire ("Second Death") per Rev 20:15. This distinction at judgment between those who had and those who did not have eternal/covenant life gives no place to Universalism. But, as stated above, the 30-70AD Millennial theories lead to the conclusion that: "After the 1,000 years, 'the rest of the dead come to covenant-spiritual-eternal life' (Rev 20:5) as did the Saints (Rev 20:4)" - and that is Universalism & Lawlessness.
Scripture does not declare universalism regardless of what others put forth.
True. Scripture does not support universal salvation and nor do I.
Therefore, if it is shown a Pre-70 Millennium and universalism is unscriptural, your argument must be revisited.
I agree. And I thank you for your congenial attitude here that is rare in the discussion. My argument for a 70-1070AD Millennium is really the way to preserve the past fulfillment view through the withering attacks to come. My opponents do not yet realize it, but I have been pointing out to the them the way of escape and preservation rather than the destruction of the past fulfillment (Preterist) view of eschatology. When the withering attacks come down like unstoppable acid rain, those who who have read with an open heart will know where to find refuge.
See also: Resurrection-transformation of the mortal-natural body at Judgment

Revelation 20:4-6 ~ foreseen around 62AD in the predictive vision by Christ's exiled Apostle John
And I foresaw THE SOULS OF those who had been beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection.
The Rev 20:4-6 passage is talking about:
Two groups of "SOULS."
A) The first group of souls are faithful martyrs of Jesus who rejected the Mark of the Beast (Nero).
B) The second group of souls are identified simply as, "the rest of the dead"
implying that both groups of SOULS are of people who are dead, (Christ's martyrs versus the rest).
It is their bodies that are dead since Christian martyrs (the first group) can never have dead souls.
Again, it is their bodies that are dead since Christian martyrs (the first group) can never be described as "spritually dead."
Therefore, Rev 20:4-6 is talking about the coming to life of bodies after death, "resurrection."
Both groups of SOULS were each coming to animate bodies again after death, "resurrection."