| Author |
Message |
Bobj
Registered user
Username: Bobj
Post Number: 545
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, July 24, 2010 - 12:33 pm: |     |
John
I agree, from a literal perspective. But the preterests say that the comment about "no more sea' refers to no more gentiles (in separation from the jews), again, taking a symbolic view of the "sea" which, at Andrews Univ, anyway, they used to teach was "peoples" of the earth. Not defending Andrews here, nor challenging you in any way . . .
And your verse in Rev 21:4 totally supports the literal view (God will wipe away all tears) unless I'm mistaken. So I agree with your comments. I certainly have unresolved grief in my life--and it's real--not symbolic!
Well, I don't want to press this much further, just to let you know that I'm interested in a better understanding of these things, either way!
Bob |
Bobj
Registered user
Username: Bobj
Post Number: 546
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, July 24, 2010 - 12:53 pm: | |
Brent
To clarify a bit, I grew up believing that the stone that hit the image referred to the 2nd coming of Christ in the future (still in the future in reference to our time, 2010).
Daniel was instructed to seal up the vision, but John was instructed not to seal up the vision, because the time was at hand.
So preterists would see the coming of the kingdom (at the first coming of Christ while he walked this earth) as consistent with the stone hitting the image at that time, I think.
I can tell I need to do a bit more study!
Bob |
Jonvil
Registered user
Username: Jonvil
Post Number: 400
Registered: 4-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, July 24, 2010 - 1:11 pm: | |
This whole thing reminds me of Adventists and their theology-when convenient-(re. scripture)
'that's what it says but that is not what it means'.
This alows a rewrite to support a presuposition.
John |
Yenc
Registered user
Username: Yenc
Post Number: 228
Registered: 6-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, July 24, 2010 - 1:17 pm: | |
Scholarly estimates for the writing of the book of Revelation place it at around A.D. 96, well after A.D. 70.
Excuse my ignorance, but I'm unfamiliar with the word "preterism" and it's not in my big dictionary. What does it refer to? |
Asurprise
Registered user
Username: Asurprise
Post Number: 1316
Registered: 7-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, July 24, 2010 - 1:36 pm: | |
I'm wondering if the words "this generation shall not pass" refer to God bringing Israel back into their land (Ezekiel 36,37) at the end. There's a reference made to a fig tree beginning to leaf out or something (in the gospels). I've heard that the fig tree starting to bud is when Israel came back into their land in 1948. Maybe that started "this generation"??? What do you think?? |
Bobj
Registered user
Username: Bobj
Post Number: 547
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, July 24, 2010 - 2:11 pm: | |
John
I cannot help but agree with you!
Yen
I don't have a clear definition either of what preterists believe. (Smiley here--) I'm not sure I have a clear definition of my own beliefs on many things!
I've read that there are serious questions about whether the Apostle John was the author. Not going to go there! But it is interesting to read about the book of Revelation . . . which is not included in the Eastern Orthodox canon. EO claim Antioch as their historical mother church--where believers were first called Christians.
Asurprise
Good question! Preterests have asked why (if this generation referred to Christ's time) why Daniel's vision was sealed up for a wait of 500 years, while John's was not to be sealed up for a wait of 2000 years? It doesn't make sense, and this is what CS Lewis was pointing out, referenced in the video.
Bob |
Loneviking
Registered user
Username: Loneviking
Post Number: 732
Registered: 7-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, July 24, 2010 - 11:59 pm: | |
Full Preeterism has more problems than you can begin to number. First is their hermaneutic, which forces every prophecy, every last day reference to be pegged to A.D. 70. Part of this is an allegorical approach to Scripture.
Second, is how this viewpoint effects other doctrines such as salvation; such as whether the antonement and Christs work was completed at the cross or not.
If you really want to dive in more to this, here's a link to a series done by my cousin, Jack Scott, who is one of the leading preeterist teachers in the country. But I warn you, preeterism is a very weird belief system!
http://ardmorefamilyofgod.org/9-13-09Video.html
The evening teaching on Eschatology begins here and continues right up until the end of July, 2010. I like my cousin, but his beliefs are just something I can't accept. I can see no reason to try to evangelize or even to have church if all there is now is the 'here and now'. If there is no guarantee of a physical return, then there are many texts that just don't make sense. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 11471
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 25, 2010 - 12:59 am: | |
The ESV study notes point out that another sense of the Greek underlying generation, genea, is "race". The note says that especially people of a dispensational view understand this passage to mean "this race shall not pass away".
It would see far-fetched to me if it were not that the word actually does carry that sense.
Colleen |
Bobj
Registered user
Username: Bobj
Post Number: 548
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, July 25, 2010 - 5:36 pm: | |
Loneviking and Colleen
Thank you for your kind comments! I think I'm at a point where I can't add much to this thread without more study.
Bob |
Bobj
Registered user
Username: Bobj
Post Number: 552
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2010 - 8:31 am: | |
For those who may be interested, I'd like to post an article that is related to coming of the kingdom. It resolves some questions, leaves others unanswered.
I'm not endorsing or proposing anything here. If you decide to look at this, please be sure to read the first two paragraphs of the article.
Here's the link:
http://www.pantelism.com/TheKingdomofGod.htm
Bob |
