Search results

Truthfully, I wasn't much of a Biblical scholar back then. I guess I was a typical target audience for their material. Someone else recently mentioned the "Four Views" book, so I'm taking that as a "sign". I've just added it to my Amazon "wish list", so I will actually buy it soon. To be...

Amen, Brother. If God's Word is not our standard, and Christ is not our Foundation, we can't even begin.

1. If dispensationalists take every time statement literally, why do words like "soon", "at the door", "near", and "quickly" change their meaning when it comes to prophecy? 2. I don't see where preterism is vague about the symbolic. Revelation contains a lot of symbolism, but quite a bit is...

I should clarify that statement. I had seen the term before, but never paid any attention to it. I first started digging into the preterist view around 2008. To back up, I'd been having doubts about the dispensationalist / futurist view since the Persian Gulf War (1990-1991). Books by "end...

Preterism is really not that different. In Preterism, God is still glorified by His hand in actual fulfillment of prophecy. Dispensationalism doesn't take as literal a view of time statements as Preterism. We understand the prophecies as fulfilled exactly as Scriptures tell us. Where we...

Since Sproul was a Reformed Theologian, that does make sense. (I've studied Sproul, but have never accepted the 5 points of Calvinism.) From my perspective, both the dispensationalist view and the preterist view are concerned with how God worked in history for His glory. I like your outline...

As I just replied on the "Dispensationalist" post, we may as well drop this. We will not agree, and there is simply no point in dragging this out any further.

At this point, I feel like we are a couple of Billy goats just butting heads. You are going to hold to the futurist view, and I am going to hold to the partial preterist view, and this is not going to change. Since neither of us are coming up with anything fresh, I'd just as soon drop it.

I would have to actually believe that I was deceived before I could admit it. No need to respond to the rest of your comments, as we've said it all before.

Yes, I hate those "bad" keystrokes :Mad With your explanation, I do see how it is not possible to be a dispensationalist and a liberal at the same time. Still don't quite get how one's eschatology affects their view of God's glory. Is this because futurists / dispensationalists are looking...

Is there any point in you and I discussing this any further? We do not agree on anything, and we keep going over the same points. The best we can do is to agree to disagree.

Rather than going over the same ground that we've covered already, I'll give a nice short answer - I disagree with everything you have said above.

I'm not entirely sure I get your point regarding liberal theology. I definitely do not hold liberal views of theology. Please do not mistake the following questions as accusations, but I would like clarification. Are you suggesting that Preterism is only a view held predominantly by liberals...

Since I am not well-versed in linguistics, I'll take your word for that. With that in mind, I still believe that Christ "came" in judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70. To clarify, this was not the 2nd Advent that is still in our future. To ask a silly question, how do you know whether preterism is...

Not necessarily. Jesus used the same kind of symbolic language that the OT prophets often used. Also, "earth" and "land" are often used to refer to the land of Israel. Just as you suggest your view is the correct one, but really can't prove it. The proof is in the pudding, but you don't like...

Because the Scriptures prove that the Beast was Rome / Nero. I am pretty familiar with the futurist view of how Daniel's 70 Weeks and NT prophecies tie together. By now, you should be pretty familiar with the Partial Preterist view of these prophecies, and that we simply will not agree. I...

Jesus "came" in judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70. In that sense, yes. What was your point in bringing that up in the first place? I mean, it is obvious that we are under grace. Except you have it backwards.

I do not believe Christ actually came spiritually. Rather, His "presence" was in the judgment - the driving force, if you will. You may be right. I can only speak from personal experience. Certainly, I have the highest regard for Sproul as well as others who have brought this view back...

Very likely, Brother. Do you think that may be because they see men failing in the leadership role, especially in the Church?

I'll go with that. Despite our different views, I do hope to be friends on this forum. I'm sure we share much more in common than what divides us.