Posted on 09/05/2013 9:47:05 AM PDT by Gamecock
God often makes such promises and then through His mercy backs away. You’ll see this all through Scripture. See for yourself.
Not much worst can happen, but the Assyrians showing up outside your city walls.
There's nothing in the Bible that says prophecies can't be fulfilled multiple times, right? For example, Christians are persecuted and killed every day.
5.56mm
We are promised that Christians will be persecuted until he returns.
I suspect we are about to see many fall away over the next couple of years.
Apparently Lee N. Field comes down on your side in the following post. If I’m not mistaken he is some sort of a Preterist-Postmill combo, and very outspoken on it, if he is indeed Preterist, in the prophetic vacuum that Preterists are in he is naturally going to dismiss what’s happening in Syria as having any prophetic significance.
It would also be interesting to know how many that have sided with you on this thread are indeed Preterists. How about you? What is your position eschatologically?
One’s position on the millennial reign of Rev. 20 has a lot to do with how they interpret such things as middle east events, and their world view.
Surely you know it is considered polite to ping someone when you mention their name in a post!
As to your question I have partial-preterist leanings and am a soft Amillennialist.
What I AM NOT is a premil-dispy.
My intention was actually to include Lee N. Fields, an oversight, I apologize for that.
I appreciate revealing your preterist “leanings,” it is thus no wonder you would not see the situation in Syria as having prophetic end time significance. I note you also seem to be pretty opposed to dispensational premill, I am a historic premill, so I am about half with you on that, not the premill.
In my view, preterism is a far worse error, whether in combo with Amill or Postmill.
Apparently Lee N. Field comes down on your side in the following post. If I’m not mistaken he is some sort of a Preterist-Postmill combo, and very outspoken on it, if he is indeed Preterist, in the prophetic vacuum that Preterists are in he is naturally going to dismiss what’s happening in Syria as having any prophetic significance.
Yeah, you might actually ping me on that.
See my FR page for a fuller treatment of my position. What I care about and why, I have tried to lay out there. (Some of the links have gone dead over time. I'll have to take some time, RSN, to fix them.)
Eschatological categories morph over time. I am not a post-millenial, in the modern sense. One's eschatological position should not be arrived at because it is "optimistic" vs. "pessimistic", but on what one holds the scripture to teach.
It would also be interesting to know how many that have sided with you on this thread are indeed Preterists. How about you? What is your position eschatologically?
Everybody slings that term around. Do you know what a preterist is? Are you able to distinguish the types of preterist? There is a sort of preterist that is absolutely beyond the pale. Not everyone is that sort. They're (best I can tell) fairly rare. I have not encountered on in the flesh.
I am not a preterist in any sense you're probably thinking. I am most certainly not the sort of preterist who thinks all prophecy was fulfilled when the Romans besieged and took Jerusalem in 70AD. I don't think John's Apocalypse was written about the fall of Jerusalem, or early.
There certainly is prophecy in the NT (and OT if you follow Meredith Kline's argument) about Jerusalem's fall. It is a significant event, in a redemptive historical sense, being the final and decisive end of the old covenant cultic order.
One’s position on the millennial reign of Rev. 20 has a lot to do with how they interpret such things as middle east events, and their world view.
You know, you might want to actually read Augustine's chapter on the millennium in his City of God. It might surprise you, if all you know of it is what the pop eschatological pundits have said.
I live in Alaska, Lee, we have a lot of people up here who devoutly read their Bibles, they have never heard of such theoretical systems as Preterist, Amill, Postmill. I have asked them how they see the tribulation section of Revelation, the second coming, first resurrection, and the millennial reign of Christ in chapters 19 & 20. Without fail, everyone of them see them as having not happened yet, future events. It is the way the Revelation naturally reads to them.
Which convinces me that Preterist Amill, with its placing of the whole of Revelation in the past, the first resurrection spiritualized, not future, in the past, followed by the tribulation just prior to 70AD, followed by a figurative millennial reign of Jesus Christ which they claim they are in now, followed by the second coming of Christ to take place AFTER the millennial reign which we are supposed to be in now, is nothing more than a theory one has to read into the Revelation.
Ordinary believers unaware of a theory they are supposed to be reading into the narrative, NEVER come up with Preterist or Amill interpretations. As to Postmill, when I explain it to them, they shake their heads in amazement that any one would believe such a thing.
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.