Replies

"2. I would say that the major point is this: They didn't just dream this position that held sway for 2 centuries. They got it from somewhere."

~ASSUMING~ this is a factually true statement (that it was the majority opinion may not be the case -again, evidence suggest this indeed may not be the case and the 'majority' position is not ~necessarily~ the correct decision), one could make the same statement regarding the Roman Catholic Church during the middle ages.

Jean

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/739777/posts?page=28#28 The above is where you say that "pre-mil is bonkers." In your last post about premil being the position of the church for the 1st 2 centuries you say: ASSUMING~ this is a factually true statement . It certainly is the position of Justin Martyr. Again the point of this discussion: "The premil position cannot lightly be dismissed as "bonkers." It is and has been from the founding of the church, a powerfully legitimate position. Just the lengths you're going to in arguing against it proves that it's occupied a large place in your thoughts and is on the short list of positions contrary to amillenialism against which you've developed a position. It is, IMO, the correct position.