Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Aw shucks. I guess so.J. Barton Payne's "Theology of the Older Testament" was our primary textbook for OT Theology when I was working on my Th.M. It was what started me thinking about Dispensational Theology and nudged me more toward Historic Premillennialism as opposed to Dispensational Premillennialism. But I am sure you will forgive him for that,
A true scholar. We knew his boy Peter when we lived in Wheaton in the '50's and early '60's. He's got a pretty good apologetics ministry to college students nowadays.
I'll check it out. Thanks.
Hmmmm. So every bible scholar and ever church historian is wrong about Clement? His famous epistle is customarily dated to the end of the reign of Domitian (95 or 96 C.E.).
I can't speak for John but I would be interested in this information. Of course, without the snide and insulting insinuation that we don't care or will not remember it. Of course we won't remember it if you refuse to post it.
"In like manner . . . "
This does not answer the question. All you are saying is that the first coming of Christ was physical but the second coming is spiritual, you are not telling why. And you are conflating the doctrine of the Kingdom of God with the 2nd coming. That's poor theology.
Nice try, but I've read some of Clement and I've read the Didache. J. R. Lightfoot (The Apostolic Fathers, p. 11) and plenty of other scholars put Clement's epistle to the Corinthians at AD 95. You stated your date for Clement as if it were fact, with no proof whatsoever. As for the Didache (likewise dated to AD 100 or after), the author was a literalist, writing, "The Lord shall come and all His saints with Him. Then shall the world see the Lord coming upon the clouds of Heaven" (ibid, 129).
I do care, and you've never said this in all of our discussions of the past. If you have someone in the early church who said Christ came in AD 70, trot them out and I'll listen.
That goes without saying. I'm a Baptist: "The Bible as the sole rule of faith and practice."
To be a preterist, one has to abandon the Biblical teaching of the vast majority of believers of all the ages of Christianity. If your preterism is correct, it is very strange that you are in such a tiny majority when so many of the rest of us love the Word of God and study it daily. Seems like the Holy Spirit would illumine the Scriptures to more than just a tiny minority of believers.
Jesus said, "And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also" (John 14:3). Now, if hyper preterism is correct and Jesus came spiritually in AD 70, we have a huge problem: Jesus left His physical body in Heaven!
I am still looking for where in recorded history Jesus returned , and had the resurrection of the saints, and Him reigning here on earth in paradise restored!Please answer the question I asked on the other thread, which no preterist has ever answered for me. If all of the prophecies of Christ's first coming, the incarnation, were fulfilled literally (Bethlehem house of David, etc.), why must the prophecies of the 2nd Coming be fulfilled "spiritually"?
And another question I asked that was never answered: where is the evidence that Jesus came in AD 70? Give one single quote from an early Christian which says so. Otherwise you, along with other preterists, are making up things.
You would be much more convincing if you quit reading junk theology such as what you've mentioned, and read serious stuff from the premil side: Things to Come by Pentecost, Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy by J. Barton Payne (historical premil), Dispensationalism by Ryrie, Revelation by Walvoord, and other important works.
Simply because you never went to college does not mean you cannot get a serious education in eschatology through self study, something you've not yet done.
And though you deny it, all scholars agree that futurism has been around since the first centuries of Christianity. "Even so, come, Lord Jesus."
So much for the claim that you're here to learn.
Again, you sadly misinterpret my mention of degrees. I nowhere attacked you for your lack of degrees. I have known some great Christians with only a high school diploma. My point (and that of Dr. Cassidy) was to give credence to my position as one that is well thought out and valid, just as Paul did when he disclosed to a Jewish audience his training under Gamaliel, the greatest scholar of the Jewish law of the whole first century (Acts 22:5).
And for the record, Keil and Delitzsch were not preterists, so you have completely misunderstood and misrepresented their position.
Hmmmm. So every bible scholar and ever church historian is wrong about Clement? His famous epistle is customarily dated to the end of the reign of Domitian (95 or 96 C.E.).
Since chap. 5 speaks of the Neronian persecution as something long past, the persecutions of Domitian (the Tyrant) are all that fits.
I can't speak for John but I would be interested in this information. Of course, without the snide and insulting insinuation that we don't care or will not remember it. Of course we won't remember it if you refuse to post it.
So the Angels that told them that this SAME Jesus would come back in same way that he left were wrong?
Many base this concept of Jesus having a spiritual body, and us also, and so he came back spiritually from 1 Cor 15, with Paul telling us of the spiritual body. The problem with that is that Paul did NOT mean that Jesus and ud were no longer in a physical form, but that iur normal flesh stae had to become glorified in order to get to and stay in heaven, and that was still a pjysical body!
Exactly! Preterism says Christ came spiritually in AD 70. But Christ now has a physical body--this is a fundamental of the faith. So in order to come "spiritually" Christ had to split Himself. Furthermore, if Christ came spiritually, that would be His deity, would it not? The doctrine of the hypostatic union mitigates against splitting the deity and humanity of Christ. Christ comes physically or not at all.
This concept of Jesus shedding off his physical form to go back to heaven and then to earth sounds more like JW seeing him as being raised spiritual as Michael again, and having an invisible return!
Think that pretty much all church historians would agree that a solid majority of them held to a premil view, and that was prominennt until, time of Augustine and his allegorical prophetic system coming into place!
I believe jesus came In judgement in AD 70. Thats what the whole topic was about the apostate jews. To read anything else into that is taking it to far. God came on the clouds many times in the OT. This generation will not pass.. You can't take one use of generation and say it means something else, when the rest of the whole time he spoke he was talking about the present generation. Why in one verse just to fit your view does the word change? Every eye is literal but generation is something else?
Jesus prediction was right. The world saw the SIGN of the son of man in the heaven, and the "whole world" saw the coming of Jesus in judgement on Jerusalem.. No SCIFI Horses and meteors, no Beasts. No StarWars type stuff, It hasn't happened before it won't happen in the future.
Futurists have been spreading the same stuff for years, and all have failed. And the books they write are ridiculous, ufos, armageddon, the birth of Israel, rapture to happen before 1988. Its all lunacy. Its why there is a book out called "why I'm not a Christian". Its preconceived knowledge to fit a understanding. I was there once, have all the left behind movies, all the books. It was interesting to me because I was into that SCIFI stuff. Until I realized wow, unless I believe the antichrist in Daniel 9:27, it really does not say that. Even the K&D commentary admits that clearly.
I feel a lot better now, knowing Jesus is already victorious, we don't need to wait until Hell on earth is unleashed for him to win, he already did, satan is powerless against us.
Im not a newspaper christian anymore, waiting for a firecracker to go off in the middle east, and getting the Bible out saying here it is. Its been like that since futurism was around.
No one is going to convince me otherwise, just like I won't convince you otherwise. But we can still continue the conversations, Even if my lack of earthy "degrees" is questioned. Since being on here Ive learned more then I have in a long time. So thank you all, Even JOJ for the commentary that fits my view
So please by all means, someone else get a topic/verse going to discuss. I don't want my uneducated Millennial problems (right JOJ?) to get in the way here. And for heaven sake, please don't let this topic be 38 posts of how to define star, or it will be 38 posts on the history of the western wall, and how it was not the western wall of the temple.
