Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

James Dobson's Focus on the Family and...Eschatology?
Triablogue ^ | September 11, 2007 | Gene Bridges

Posted on 09/12/2007 9:05:47 AM PDT by topcat54

Today as I drove my Mom home from her dental appointment, we listened to Focus on the Family. All this week, FoF is focusing on "Radical Islam and the Family." I'd like to make a few observations.

1. Granted, we only caught the last fifteen minutes, but at no point was there any discussion of "the family and Islam," unless by this, one means something like, "Radical Islam wants to overthrow America and we should support the Iraq War."

2. Most, if not all, of the broadcast focused on Joel Rosenberg's bestseller Epicenter.

3. Consequently, we were treated to a short discourse on Ezekiel 38 - 39 on Gog and Magog.

Now, there's nothing wrong with that, except the words "evangelical Christians should..." were repeated several times. The insinuation, in my opinion, was that if you don't believe as Rosenberg and Dobson say, you aren't really an evangelical Christian. Further, no alternative view was ever presented.

Of course, none of this ever got around to topics like:

a. How do we interact with Muslims in evangelism?
b. How do we interact with them in apologetics?
c. How does Muslim family structure / relationships within said structure, fall short of the biblical standard and how can we show this when evangelizing Muslims or discipling those coming out of Muslim backgrounds who are now Christians?

Rather, it was "We must protect ourselves from Islam by supporting President Bush," who, as we know, has Dobson's approval - which he was sure to state many times.

(Excerpt) Read more at triablogue.blogspot.com ...


TOPICS: Theology
KEYWORDS: booktour; dobson; endtimes; epicenter; eschtology; ezekiel38; fotf; joelcrosenberg
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-160 next last
Gene's conclusion:
Likewise, I am hoping that we get so hear about evangelizing Muslims, etc. It's high time FoF talked about the gospel as the tool to counteract Islam, not supporting the war and keeping an eye on Iran. Sure, the latter has its place, and I don't deny that; but, as Christians - as Christians in a ministry - they should be helping people realize that our ultimate tool is the gospel itself.

So, I'd like to conclude this article with a challenge:

1. Granted, I doubt anybody from FoF reads this blog, but if so, I'd like to challenge them to bring on somebody like O.P. Robertson or Kim Riddlebarger to present an alternative biblical presentation.

2. I'd like to encourage the readers here to contact FoF and ask them to do just that as well - and to get FoF away from "Insert Issue Here Alert of the Day" and how many petitions to sign or which representatives to contact to actually discussing the biblical foundations of family life, evangelism, discipleship, etc.


1 posted on 09/12/2007 9:05:51 AM PDT by topcat54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ItsOurTimeNow; HarleyD; suzyjaruki; nobdysfool; jkl1122; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; Dr. Eckleburg; ...
Reformed Eschatology Ping List (REPL)

"For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled." (Luke 21:22)

2 posted on 09/12/2007 9:07:05 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

Evangelism takes years, maybe generations and we do not have that much time to counteract this threat. The private sector needs to continue reaching out with the Word but the government must continue its path of vigilance and proactive intervention.


3 posted on 09/12/2007 9:18:20 AM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

The writer heard 15 minutes of one session out of four...and draws these conclusions. That is 15 minutes out of 2 hours. Wouldn’t a little more research be advisable before jumping?


4 posted on 09/12/2007 9:36:44 AM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper

I heard a good portion of the presentation today and that was my conclusion as well.

FoF has become largely a Republican PAC, esp. when it comes to Bush.

The alarm bells are sounded such as “if we don’t do anything ...” usually resolves to Bush taking action against radical Islamists around the world rather than “the Church militant making disciples of all nations”, including Islamic ones.


5 posted on 09/12/2007 9:49:53 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

Let’s face it - much of Dobson’s core market consists of premil dispys. Much of his material is good, but I’m not surprised to see him marketing to that group.


6 posted on 09/12/2007 10:00:49 AM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

IOW, “Christians United for Israel” meets the Republican Party.


7 posted on 09/12/2007 10:13:12 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: topcat54; Dr. Eckleburg

***Of course, none of this ever got around to topics like:

a. How do we interact with Muslims in evangelism?***

Why, that is because the church in America today is little more than an Arminian political arm with a political agenda, not an evangelical agenda. Instead of focusing on the great commission “preach to all the world as a WITNESS” and letting conversions and the end of the world be up to God, it is “you should support.”

Not that I have a problem with politics. I just have a problem when politics becomes the gospel.

LC


8 posted on 09/12/2007 10:38:19 AM PDT by Lord_Calvinus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
Now, there's nothing wrong with that, except the words "evangelical Christians should..." were repeated several times. The insinuation, in my opinion, was that if you don't believe as Rosenberg and Dobson say, you aren't really an evangelical Christian. Further, no alternative view was ever presented.

My wife was telling me about this. It sounded like pretty typical stuff. The default evangelical eschatological theory -- some variant of Hal Lindsay's Late Grate, adjusted to reflect the menace of the decade, and how Rosh really is Russia, etc. You can fill in the blanks yourself.

Granted, I doubt anybody from FoF reads this blog, but if so, I'd like to challenge them to bring on somebody like O.P. Robertson or Kim Riddlebarger to present an alternative biblical presentation.

To bad (for us, not for him) Meredith Kline is dead. I just finished his God , Heaven and Har Magedon (a first, rushed pass through on a borrowed copy, anyway). Dobson, et al, interacting with that would be interesting.

9 posted on 09/12/2007 11:20:09 AM PDT by Lee N. Field ("Dispensationalism -- threat or menace?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

Although I am one of those darned premils, I completely agree that the Gospel is one our best tools in the struggle for civilzation.

I just finished reading Unveiling Islam by Ergun and Emir Caner (Now Christians but raised as Muslims). The book gives detailed information about the history and beliefs of Muslims and then shows how Christians can begin a dialogue and eventually present the Gospel. It’s pretty good IMHO.

marinamuffy


10 posted on 09/12/2007 11:34:13 AM PDT by marinamuffy ("..pacifism ensures that cruelty will prevail on earth." - Dennis Prager/ www.gohunter08.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54; P-Marlowe; Quix; XeniaSt; Buggman

I bet Dobson does that as soon as your church hosts John MacArthur’s lecture on premillennialism.

LOL!

It’s radio. If you don’t like the program don’t listen, don’t donate.

But, puh...leeeeese, don’t say inane things like: “They only talked about stuff that THEY support and believe in.” Rothlol!!


11 posted on 09/12/2007 11:56:07 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Thanks.

Will check later. Am at the college.


12 posted on 09/12/2007 1:47:26 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xzins
...bring on somebody like O.P. Robertson or Kim Riddlebarger to present an alternative biblical presentation

Well? Which is it? Kim Riddlebarger, or a Biblical presentation?

13 posted on 09/12/2007 2:08:42 PM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BibChr

yes


14 posted on 09/12/2007 2:33:39 PM PDT by Lee N. Field ("Dispensationalism -- threat or menace?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

Now this should prove an interesting read!


15 posted on 09/12/2007 5:22:12 PM PDT by Alex Murphy (John 3:30 "He must increase, but I must decrease.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
I'd like to challenge them to bring on somebody like O.P. Robertson or Kim Riddlebarger to present an alternative biblical presentation.

Kind of like a Fairness Doctrine for Preterists, right.

16 posted on 09/12/2007 6:44:38 PM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
It’s radio. If you don’t like the program don’t listen, don’t donate.

[shrug]. I haven't listened to Dobson or FotF for close to 20 years. Back in the day, every other show it seemed he was bashing men (playing to his audience). It got to be just too much.

17 posted on 09/12/2007 7:09:43 PM PDT by Lee N. Field ("Dispensationalism -- threat or menace?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
“Christians United for Israel” meets the Republican Party.

Been done (train wreck warning -- painful to watch).

18 posted on 09/12/2007 7:12:31 PM PDT by Lee N. Field ("Dispensationalism -- threat or menace?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lee N. Field

It’s good you had some sense of what you wanted to listen to and what you didn’t.

I wish Congress had a channel changer.


19 posted on 09/12/2007 8:15:21 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: BibChr; P-Marlowe; Quix
Well? Which is it? Kim Riddlebarger, or a Biblical presentation?

One consolation in the era of Osama bin Laden would be Kim Riddlebarger

Since Satan is bound, that means that we can't be the Great Satan.

It also means that Osama, if you remember the Satan head in the smoke of the WTC burning, can't be Satan.

In fact, it means Osama ain't even satanic, and that everything is peachy keen, rosey as far as the eye can see.

One day with the newspaper is better than truth serum when it comes to any amillennialist.

20 posted on 09/12/2007 8:24:52 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
Gene sounds like a disgruntled 60’s retread. Most of his criticisms were irrelevant because the focus of Focus on the Family is on preserving and promoting the Christian family, not on being a mission organization dedicated to hosting dialogs about the best way to evangelize Muslims. There are other organizations that do that.
21 posted on 09/12/2007 8:31:44 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
I'd like to encourage the readers here to contact FoF and ask them to do just that as well - and to get FoF away from "Insert Issue Here Alert of the Day" and how many petitions to sign or which representatives to contact to actually discussing the biblical foundations of family life, evangelism, discipleship, etc.

IMO a very good point. While I understand why FoF has become more "issue of the day" driven, they aren't the same program they were twenty years ago. I find myself listening to Family Life Today with Dennis Rainey, for the kind of content I used to listen to FoF for.

22 posted on 09/12/2007 8:59:42 PM PDT by Alex Murphy (John 3:30 "He must increase, but I must decrease.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

I have met Jim at Christian Psych Assoc type meetings when he used to have time for such. He’s authentic.

He can be . . . challenging . . . for his editors to work with as he knows precisely what he wants and insists on it being his way, period . . . as I understand it. But he does tremendous good for our Nation and for the family. And I praise God for his ministry and work.

He cares deeply for the family and our Nation.

I’m glad he’s doing the job he’s been more or less pressed into doing. No one else was doing quite what needed to be done in terms of activism in behalf of major political issues and forces impacting the family and our family values.

I don’t know that there are enough folks spouting family life help sorts of things . . . which he still does from time to time. But there are more than one or two at this point in time.


23 posted on 09/12/2007 9:55:42 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: xzins; P-Marlowe; XeniaSt
I bet Dobson does that as soon as your church hosts John MacArthur’s lecture on premillennialism.

LOL!

Hah!! That’s funny.

Not to get side-tracked, but you seem unable to differentiate between the Church and a parachurch ministry like FoF.

Most churches have a confession of faith that defines pretty clearly what the Bible etaches in certain areas and, therefore, what is acceptable teaching within that church or denomination. Mine happens to exclude MacArthur-style dispensational premillennialism. Similarly, Grace Community Church would probably not invite Ken Gentry to preach on the subject of the Book of Revelation.

On the other hand, FoF looks to a broader audience and support base and claims to speak for a broader Christian community. Most people don’t understand the term “evangelical Christian” as only referring to the particular sub-species known as Christian Zionist or dispensational premillennialist.

FoF either doesn’t get it, or is so confused by their political agenda that they view “end times Israel” and “radical Islam” as principle barometers of the “signs of the times”, a view not shared by many knowledgeable and politically active Christians.

24 posted on 09/13/2007 5:11:11 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
focus of Focus on the Family is on preserving and promoting the Christian family

And taking a week of shows to discuss radical Islam helps this effort how?

You seem to be missing the perhaps subtle shift in emphasis that has occurred at FoF since they started seeing themselves as the mover and shaker within Christian Republican Party(tm).

25 posted on 09/13/2007 5:13:50 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
"somebody like O.P. Robertson or Kim Riddlebarger"

Kind of like a Fairness Doctrine for Preterists, right.

Shows what you know. Neither Robertson nor Riddlebarger are preterists.

26 posted on 09/13/2007 5:15:13 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: topcat54; P-Marlowe; BibChr; Quix
On the other hand, FoF looks to a broader audience ...

Horse puckey, tc, and you know it.

These ministries all have their doctrinal positions, too.....and those of their leadership. Dobson appears to be an evangelical, conservative premiller.

He just beat one witch hunt from the IRS. Are we going to initiate one now by the preterists?

"Yer honor...he dared speak his theology. Can we take away his tax status, his donations, his car, his house, his wife, and his wrist watch....oh yeah...almost forgot....take his bible, too!"

27 posted on 09/13/2007 5:26:16 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
Shows what you know. Neither Robertson nor Riddlebarger are preterists.

By your definition, of course.

28 posted on 09/13/2007 5:44:10 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: topcat54; Quix
You seem to be missing the perhaps subtle shift in emphasis that has occurred at FoF since they started seeing themselves as the mover and shaker within Christian Republican Party(tm).

On the one hand you speak of a subtle shift. On the other hand you presume to know the individual beliefs of the members of the organization and whether or how they are melded to effect a change ("the perhaps subtle shift") in the ongoing work of the organization (well, at least on "emphasis"). So, either you actually know these individuals and their changing views of themselves and are able then to relate that to a subtle change you perhaps believe you see in programming emphasis or you're looking at what you believe to be a "perhaps subtle shift in emphasis" and attributing it to an imagined change in the beliefs of the members of the organization.
29 posted on 09/13/2007 6:04:14 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
By your definition, of course.

And what definition would that be?

30 posted on 09/13/2007 6:19:41 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: xzins; P-Marlowe
Horse puckey, tc, and you know it.

FoF has difficulties with the IRS because it wants to be tax exempt while at the same time advocating specific political positions that seem to run in parallel with the Republican Party. As long as they want to be a 501(c)(3) organization, they need to learn to play the tune the IRS wants them to play.

"Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

But the issue here is not the IRS, but the emphasis by FoF on radical Islam in support of the Bush/Republican political agenda. Same kind of nonsense we get from the “Christians United For Israel” crowd.

31 posted on 09/13/2007 6:29:30 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: topcat54; P-Marlowe
As long as they want to be a 501(c)(3) organization, they need to learn to play the tune the IRS wants them to play.

Apparently, you don't keep up with FoF very much. The IRS was launched against them by more of the bitter enemies, and the IRS found the charges ALL unfounded, spurious.

So, I'd say that FoF has that perfectly in hand.

As to their unjust critics. They will eventually answer to God for any false accusations.

32 posted on 09/13/2007 6:46:35 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: topcat54; P-Marlowe
As long as they want to be a 501(c)(3) organization, they need to learn to play the tune the IRS wants them to play.

Apparently, you don't keep up with FoF very much. The IRS was launched against them by more of the bitter enemies, and the IRS found the charges ALL unfounded, spurious.

So, I'd say that FoF has that perfectly in hand.

As to their unjust critics. They will eventually answer to God for any false accusations.

33 posted on 09/13/2007 6:48:58 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
By your definition, of course.

And what definition would that be?

Your definition -- which you think somehow excludes amillenialists like Kim Riddlebarger. Here from Kim Riddlebarger's Blog:

I have written on this matter in my book A Case for Amillennialism. Here is a section which deals with your question (taken from pages 168-173)

In verse 15 of the Olivet Discourse, Jesus answers the disciple’s original question about the destruction of the temple, “when will these things happen?” ... Jesus now speaks of a period of great tribulation unsurpassed throughout the history of Israel. Dispensational writers argue that this passage must be interpreted in light of Daniel 9:27, which is assigned to a future seven-year tribulation period. If true, Jesus is here speaking of some distant future event yet to come. According to John Walvoord, “Christ was not talking here about fulfillment in the first century, but prophecy to be related to His actual second coming to the earth in the future.”

But there are good reasons to think that Jesus is speaking about the events of A.D. 70 .... [blah ... blah ... blah]

And that statement is different from Preterism how???? Preterists and Amillenialists and Replacement Theologians all drink from the same well despite their pretenses to the contrary.

34 posted on 09/13/2007 7:15:06 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Since Satan is bound, that means that we can't be the Great Satan.

Iranian Shiite rhetoric is not directly relevant to the question.

It also means that Obama, if you remember the Satan head in the smoke of the WTC burning, can't be Satan.

In fact, it means Obama ain't even satanic, and that everything is peachy keen, rosey as far as the eye can see.

No it doesn't. What does John's Apocalypse say about Satan's bound condition? Note also that the great enemy will be let loose from his restrictions for a brief time at the end.

35 posted on 09/13/2007 7:23:51 AM PDT by Lee N. Field ("Dispensationalism -- threat or menace?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Lee N. Field; P-Marlowe; Alamo-Girl; Quix; blue-duncan; BibChr

So, you’re saying that the Lord has ALREADY returned???

Now that is....odd.


36 posted on 09/13/2007 7:26:11 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Thanks for the ping!


37 posted on 09/13/2007 7:26:49 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
Dr. Dobson’s father was a minister in the Church of the Nazarene. That denomination, which is in the Wesleyan tradition, does not hold to a premillenial eschatology as many Baptists and charismatics and most Bible churches do. Insofar as I know, the Wesleys were amillenialists, as were most Protestants before 1800, following in the footsteps of Augustine, whose teachings strongly influenced Luther, Calvin, and most of the Reformers.
38 posted on 09/13/2007 7:30:58 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip; Alex Murphy; Lee N. Field
Your definition -- which you think somehow excludes amillenialists like Kim Riddlebarger. Here from Kim Riddlebarger's Blog:

You are confused, so let me help you clear things up.

Amil and preterist are orthogonal to one another. The sets are (amil, postmil, premil,dispensational) and (preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist). One can be a preterist postmil or a preterist amil or even preterist premil. The only thing one cannot be is a preterist or historicist dispensationalist. (Dispensationalism require an association with futurism.)

Riddlebarger is a historicist amil who happens to interpret a portion of the Olivet Discourse as referring to AD70. This is not uncommon, but it does not make him a preterist. In fact there are many dispensationalists who also happen to interpret portions of the Olivet Discourse as referring to AD70. (They usually are the ones who push for a “double fulfillment”, AD70 and the future “great tribulation”).

I hope this explanation will help you to carry on a reasonable discussion on the subject in the future.

39 posted on 09/13/2007 7:56:05 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.
Thanks for the info.

What makes you think that Dobson, Sr. was not premil, or that Dobson, Jr. holds to the same eschatology as his father's denomination? Is Dobson, Jr. still in the Nazarene denomination?

As I reviewed Church of the Nazarene Articles of Faith, it seems to me that it would allow any view; pre-, post-, or amil.

40 posted on 09/13/2007 8:05:22 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: xzins
So, you’re saying that the Lord has ALREADY returned???

Now that is....odd.

No, I am not.

See post 39.

41 posted on 09/13/2007 8:23:54 AM PDT by Lee N. Field ("Dispensationalism -- threat or menace?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
I don’t know what Dr. Dobson’s eschatological views are, although I believe he still is a member of the Church of the Nazarene. His ministry focuses on family and behavioral matters, and is not a teaching ministry that deals with a wide range of subjects, as Insight for Living, Grace to You, or Ligonier are. I am not as familiar with Wesleyan circles as I am Reformed. The Westminster Standards and the Three Forms of Unity are not specific with respect to millennial positions, although in their adherence to covenantal theology, they reject the dispensational position held by a majority of premillennialsts, especially those who adhere to the pre-trib rapture. As a matter of belief, most Reformed theologians have been amillennial, although they also rejected the full preterist position held by some theonomists. The same is true for most Lutheran and Wesleyan theologians, insofar as I know. Neither Wesley nor Luther adhered to a distinction between Israel and the church insofar as their respective roles in the end times and the millennium. My guess would be that while there may be some Nazarenes who hold to a premillennial position, it would not be a dispensational premillennialism, but historic premillennialism.
42 posted on 09/13/2007 9:05:02 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Lee N. Field

Post 39 was no help.

What are you trying to say?


43 posted on 09/13/2007 9:07:36 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip; Alex Murphy; Lee N. Field
If you want to get an accurate assessment of what Riddlebarger believes (and save yourself some embarrassment), try reading his series on Revelation that he's been posting on his blog, e.g.:
The first cycle of judgment in Revelation 6:1-8:1–the seal judgments– covers the entire period of time between Christ’s first advent and second coming [emp. added], before culminating in the sixth seal, which is the return of the Lord. The series of seal judgments brings death and destruction upon one fourth of the earth’s inhabitants and demonstrates the Lamb’s authority to bring judgment upon the earth.
He is clearly not a preterist.
44 posted on 09/13/2007 9:14:35 AM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Post 39 was no help.

What are you trying to say?

OK, let's go slow.

So, you’re saying that the Lord has ALREADY returned???

No, I'm not. What made you think that I might have?

Post 39:

Amil and preterist are orthogonal to one another. The sets are (amil, postmil, premil,dispensational) and (preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist). One can be a preterist postmil or a preterist amil or even preterist premil.

On different conceptional axes, varying independently of each other. Holding to amillenialism does not imply holding to preterism, and vice versa.

You're not perceiving distinctions that you should (which is something I though dispensationalist were really good at).

Not all preterists (not even vary many, that I can see) say that everything predicted is now past. I certainly do not. I look around me, and see tears and death. This is not the eternal state.

45 posted on 09/13/2007 11:54:41 AM PDT by Lee N. Field ("Dispensationalism -- threat or menace?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Lee N. Field; xzins

Not good at “rightly dividing”? How can that be?

It could also be that when some people hear the word “preterist” they automatically think of hyper-preterist no matter what you might say to disabuse them of this idea.


46 posted on 09/13/2007 12:22:32 PM PDT by topcat54 ("Friends don't let friends listen to dispensationalists.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

So then he is what: an Amillenial Historicist with Preterist Leanings. Where do you fit in that classification???


47 posted on 09/13/2007 4:11:10 PM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip; Alex Murphy; Lee N. Field
So then he is what: an Amillenial Historicist with Preterist Leanings. Where do you fit in that classification???

If everyone who sees some fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse in AD70 as having "Preterist Leanings", then I guess that is so.

Methinks that "preterist" to you is such a dirty word that you love to tar folks with whom you disagree with it even if they are not.

48 posted on 09/13/2007 4:31:49 PM PDT by topcat54 ("Friends don't let friends listen to dispensationalists.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip; Alex Murphy; Lee N. Field
Sorry, I pressed "post" too soon.

Where do you fit in that classification???

I'm preterist postmil. I see much of prophecy fulfilled in the "generation" from Christ's resurrection to AD70. I also believe in a future physical second coming of Christ, before which time the gospel will have great success in the world by the power of the Holy Spirit. The general resurrection and judgment and the consummation of all things happen at the second coming.

49 posted on 09/13/2007 4:35:53 PM PDT by topcat54 ("Friends don't let friends listen to dispensationalists.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Lee N. Field

It still has nothing to do with the point.

You suggested that Satan had been bound and is now unbound. That means that Christ has returned and the millennial reign has ended. See Ch’s 19&20 Revelation. They follow one another.


50 posted on 09/13/2007 5:29:31 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-160 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson