[P-Marlowe]

Preterists can go through a laundry list of items taken directly from Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 along with the majority of the book of Revelation and map them onto events leading up to and including AD70..

And their entire theology hinges upon an impossible to prove assumption that the Book of Revelation was written before AD70; an assumption with no basis in fact. As was shown on a prior thread, all the empirical evidence points to Revelation being penned no earlier than AD90.

[Quix]

Thanks.

Sometimes facts are such welcome things.

Inconvenient for tidy little boxed biases but still . . . welcome to the wise.

[topcat54]

And their entire theology hinges upon an impossible to prove assumption that the Book of Revelation was written before AD70;

Oh, so now we have left the realm of interpreting the Bible and move to interpreting the documents of church historians. Last time I checked there as no copyright date on the Book of Revelation, or any other book of the Bible. When they were written is matter of honest debate among scholars. You do admit that there are many competent scholars with no axe to grind who believe Revelation was written prior to AD70, don't you? Or are they all just "party hacks" in your mind?

And the last time I checked no one had placed a seal of infallibility on the writings of Irenaeus, Eusebius, Jerome, or other of the early fathers.

Theology ought to be based on Scripture alone. What our theology tells us about the world is a different issue.

Question, does not the anti-preterist rely just as much if not more on the post AD70-date as the preterist may value the pre-AD70 date? If the pre-AD70 date is true your futurist system is very much in jeopardy.