Preterism is a recent invention having been created by Jesuit priests toward the end of the 16th century. It is and always has been an outlier of a doctrine and only recently has seen a surge of support from primarily reformed folks. Any attempt to tie futurism to scofield is simply born out of ignorance and the inability to defend a fringe doctrine.
-
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!
Historical Blessedness and Present (and Future) Irrelevance of Jewishness
- Thread starter asterisktom
- Start date
You are trying to force "Jacob" to be only "lost Israel" but the term is often used synonymously with Israel, lost and saved. Psa.14:7, Psa. 22:23, etc. More often than not, like in Isaiah, "Jacob" refers to believers, Isaiah 41:8; 43:1, etc.
It must not be overlooked that this Romans passage is a quotation from Isaiah 59.20, speaking of Christ's coming as still future from their standpoint. The Romans passage is also in the future tense because it is a quotation from Isaiah.
To imagine that this conversion of Israel is something still all future is the same logic that could say that the Virgin Birth will still come about, seeing that Isaiah 7:14 is also written in the future tense.
No, I am not trying to force anything upon the passage, but I am interpreting it in connection with the immediate contextual evidence that precedes and follows it.
Those five questions I asked are based upon explicit statements in the text that cannot possibly apply to any generation "remnant" or to "spiritual Israel" concept.
Yes, and it is still future from Paul's point of view as the latter part of verse 25 demands. The overall context is that the nation Israel is what has been rejected, fallen, cut off and God has turned to the Gentiles to call out a people but this is a temporary not permenant action by God "till the fullness of the Gentiles be come in." Moreover, previous to verse 25b there is repeated statements to show that God is not finished with what God has cut off, but that Israel the nation has not permenantly stumbled or fallen completely out of God's purposes of election. The term "again" also demonstrates this.
Anyone who does not have a position to defend and is objective can easily see what I am saying as the text is quite clear on this point.
Lodic
Well-Known Member
That is a common misconception. While Jesuit priests of the 16th century taught this view, they did not invent it. On the other hand, Dispensationalism was invented around 1830 by Darby, and popularized by Scofield later. But I digress. Many in the Early Church held a preterist view. This is not an opinion from ignorance, but based upon fact. I, for one, am thankful for the recent surge of this doctrine. The Church is returning to it's original eschatological teachings.
Getting more to the heart of the issue is WHY preterism is a valid interpretative method. Audience reference ("this generation", etc.) and time statements ("near", "at hand", etc.) clearly indicate the 1st century fulfillment. There is a very strong argument that Revelation was written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, which in turn, strongly indicates that this prophecy points to AD 70.
Whether to accept this view or not is entirely up to the individual, of course. However, it really needs to be on the basis of an unbiased examination of the view, and not on the accusation that this is a recent Catholic invention.
No, these passages all refer to the nation Israel as a chosen people without reference to any individaulized redemptive status. However, with regard to Israel's future in connection to election their salvation is promised (Ezek. 36:24-28; Jer. 31:31-34; etc.). Their furture salvation is based upon the new covenant which is first promised to Israel. The new covenant is the basis for salvation for all previous to Israel, after the rejection of Israel and in the future salvation of Israel.
Why are you bringing Preterism into this? Have an ax to grind?
Just this morning I came across this interesting page below.
So ALL ISRAEL SHALL BE SAVED
Philip Mauro says some of the very things I wrote in my posts. He also links futurism with Scofield. Hmm, Rev, guess he is ignorant too. Possibly a full-blown Preterist too to boot.
Lodic
Well-Known Member
That's some good reading, Tom.Why are you bringing Preterism into this? Have an ax to grind?
Just this morning I came across this interesting page below.
So ALL ISRAEL SHALL BE SAVED
Philip Mauro says some of the very things I wrote in my posts. He also links futurism with Scofield. Hmm, Rev, guess he is ignorant too. Possibly a full-blown Preterist too to boot.
Thanks for the link.
That's some good reading, Tom.
You are most welcome, Lodic! The Internet can be quite useful.
Philip Mauro was instrumental in my finally getting out of Pre-wrath Dispensationalism many years ago.
Why are you bringing Preterism into this? Have an ax to grind?
Just this morning I came across this interesting page below.
So ALL ISRAEL SHALL BE SAVED
Philip Mauro says some of the very things I wrote in my posts. He also links futurism with Scofield. Hmm, Rev, guess he is ignorant too. Possibly a full-blown Preterist too to boot.
Of course I have an axe to grind but your blade is just as sharp as mine. Oh and hey, you found a link that agrees with you. We will all have a heart attack and die of not surprised.