Posted on 12/15/2015 4:32:45 PM PST by grumpa
Al Gore didn't.
But seriously, do we expect a literal fulfillment of apocalyptic language?
Preterism has about as much validity as a flat earth
Therefore what was the point for St. Paul to spread the gosple if Jesus already came the 2nd time ?
I am sure historians would have recorded the great shout of the trumpet when Jesus came.
I guess we missed it or something like that.
What about the prophecy of Israel becoming a nation again ?
Kent also endorsed Hillary Clinton. Talk about disjointed thought.
I am a Kent fan but that endorsement baffles me.
I think it was dated at the end of the Domitian era? AD 81 or a little later. Fall of the temple was what AD 70?
Something like that.
Your proof for that is what, exactly? I don't think you can get it from the text.
Dated by whom, based on what?
Biblical scholars. Of course, being a preterist, you wouldn’t think that it was after the fall of the Temple. Never mind.
“Of course, being a preterist....”
Why do you assume that Campion is a preterist. If I’m not mistaken, I think he/she is Catholic which suggests amillenialism.
My apologies. I will stay out of this. I need to do some reading on this....found a great source countering Preterism.
External sources, Origin, Josephus, etc. have indicated that John was exiled to Patmos by Domitian (sp?).
That's a pretty good time indicator.
Actually, Sproul is a "partial preterist". He believes much of what is depicted in Revelation already happened but he believes the Second Coming is a future event. In fact, he has actually been backing off his partial preterism to some degree in recent years.
While I don’t agree with a pure preterist eschatology, I do think you can make a better argument for it than you can for dispensational position. I don’t anyone has really given a complete, accurate end times theory because we have no had enough historical revelation to do so. Currently I most favor an idealist approach as put forward in Beale’s commentary. Voddie Baucham has excellent sermon series which takes this position and can be found on the sermonaudio.com website on the page for Grace Baptist Church.
Tacitus and Josephus wrote extensively on early Christianity with dates/reigns.
Romans tried to kill John by boiling him alive among other things. Once they figured out it was divine will keeping him alive, he was exiled.
He’s lost his marbles on more than a few decisions he’s made.
Exactly!
The point of preterists is that they believe in the “kingdom now” concept.
Israel means nothing to them. Moral depravity that is currently ratcheting up as a sign of the Tribulation, means nothing either.
Satan hates the pre tribulation rapture so much so that he’s actually trying to delay it IMHO.
It’s his doomsday clock. Once that trump sounds, he knows his countdown has begun.
It’s why there is such a foaming hatred for it, even within surprisingly Christian circles.
BTW...JD is awesome!
I guess some Christians just have glue for brains.
Pretty much the ISIL doctrine.
Exactly. All of the attestation for this comes from patristic sources, not from Scripture itself. That's my point; it flunks the sola scriptura test quite decisively.
Josephus had nothing to say about it; neither does Origen. The original testimony seems belong to Irenaeus, who wrote:
We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.
People writing after him, like Eusebius or Jerome, may be passing on an unreliable oral tradition based on a particular interpretation of Irenaeus' words.
Irenaeus' own statement is ambiguous, and even more ambiguous in the Greek. It could mean that "the apocalyptic vision" was seen towards the end of Domitian's reign, or it could mean that John himself was seen, that is, was still alive, as recently as the end of Domitian's reign.
The text itself argues for a date before AD 70. The opening verse says that it describes things which must soon take place, and the only reasonable candidate for those "things" which could have happened "soon" would be the fall of Jerusalem, which is a "type" or foreshadowing for the end of the world.
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.