techboy Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Hmmm, let's see Craig Koester, Dr. Ben Witherington III, at least the 15 people in my Exegesis of Revelation class, not to mention all the other people who intuitively sense that something isn't quite right about Premil-Dispensationalism. I've never heard of Koester, but I recently developed a passing familiarity with Witherington. I had no idea he was a heret..., er, preterist, though. Anyway, I was just yanking your chains about the relative scarcity of preterists. I actually know of a few that participate on another board I sometimes visit. Actually, I have been developing partial preterist leanings recently, though I've not made a serious enough study to firmly commit (and I'm not sure I will... it took Hannegraff years as I recall). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Just saw this a few minutes ago. Seemed pertinent to some earlier discussion on this thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Hmmm, let's see Craig Koester, Dr. Ben Witherington III, at least the 15 people in my Exegesis of Revelation class, not to mention all the other people who intuitively sense that something isn't quite right about Premil-Dispensationalism. Like I said earlier Premil-Dispen has escapism and sensationalism going for it which makes it incredibly marketable, Give the man a prize! Watch out though, Lahaye, Jenkins, and Ice are gunning for you. :laugh: Man I can't stand their Pret-Trib blather. Its why I stopped listening to David Jeremiah and Chuck Smith, even though they are great expositors most of the time. I myself am considered a Premil Partial Preterist. In that I believe in a Premil physical resurrection of ALL in Christ, a 1000 year reign of Christ. Yet I also fully acknowledge that almost all of the symbols throughout Revelation point to historical figures (Nero & Domitian) and events (persecuted apostolic church) in the time of John of Patmos, but that those symbols can be seen as representative of trends throughout human history. A Premil-Preterist? That is the first I've ever heard of one. Wow, its like discovering a new species. Most Preterists are Post- or Amill. Are you sure you're not an historicist like most of the fathers of the Reformation?I'm an Historicist-Premill...but I'm starting to look at Amillenialism a lot. It just seems more and more "right" every time I look at the Scriptures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 I've never heard of Koester, but I recently developed a passing familiarity with Witherington. I had no idea he was a heret..., er, preterist, though. LOL! My Exegesis of Revelation class was taught by Dr. Ben Witherington III, I also had my Intro to New Testament class with him, we just call him Dr. Ben. He's one of the most widely published professors at Asbury Seminary where I go to school, he has something like 30 books to his credit, and he has a phenomenal historical study of Biblical prophecy called Jesus the Seer, in it he traces the development of Biblical prophecy throughout history, he also shows how similar trends were developing at the same time in non-Hebraic cultures in the Ancient Near East, including what we know as the apocalyptic genre of prophetic literature, but I'll warn now, it is a heavy read. Anyway, I was just yanking your chains about the relative scarcity of preterists. I actually know of a few that participate on another board I sometimes visit. Yeah, I knew what you were doing, just wanted to make sure that we're counting everyone. Actually, I have been developing partial preterist leanings recently, though I've not made a serious enough study to firmly commit (and I'm not sure I will... it took Hannegraff years as I recall). If you're really serious, Jesus the Seer, Revelation: and the End of All Things, by Craig Koester. If you get one of the two get Koester's, its an easier read and focuses on Revelation and does an excellent job of working through the letter to the seven churches, and showing the historical sources of John's visions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 LOL! My Exegesis of Revelation class was taught by Dr. Ben Witherington III, I also had my Intro to New Testament class with him, we just call him Dr. Ben. He's one of the most widely published professors at Asbury Seminary where I go to school, he has something like 30 books to his credit, and he has a phenomenal historical study of Biblical prophecy called Jesus the Seer, in it he traces the development of Biblical prophecy throughout history, he also shows how similar trends were developing at the same time in non-Hebraic cultures in the Ancient Near East, including what we know as the apocalyptic genre of prophetic literature, but I'll warn now, it is a heavy read.Yeah, I knew what you were doing, just wanted to make sure that we're counting everyone. If you're really serious, Jesus the Seer, Revelation: and the End of All Things, by Craig Koester. If you get one of the two get Koester's, its an easier read and focuses on Revelation and does an excellent job of working through the letter to the seven churches, and showing the historical sources of John's visions. You may also want to check out Dee Dee Warren's site http://www.preteristsite.com. She's one of the best partial-presterist apologists I've heard. She does a great commentary on Matthew 24. Really does her homework. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Man I can't stand their Pret-Trib blather. Its why I stopped listening to David Jeremiah and Chuck Smith, even though they are great expositors most of the time. Yeah, the problem I have is that if you listen to the Dispensationalist bunch you soon find that almost every passage in all of the Bible in some crazy and obscure way somehow fits their model, but what's really happening is that they are viewing scripture through the filter of Dispensationalism instead of letting the scripture inform our view. A Premil-Preterist? That is the first I've ever heard of one. Wow, its like discovering a new species. Most Preterists are Post- or Amill. Are you sure you're not an historicist like most of the fathers of the Reformation? Yeah, the line where I stand is blurred quite a bit between Historicist and Partial Preterist due to my understanding that the "tribulation" describes the current state of things, there are some places that I disagree with Preterism too. If someone described me as a historicist in debate I would understand why. But, historcism's view of the Catholic church is something that I ardently disagree with. But I have to take the Pre-Mil postition due to my belief in a physical resurrection for all in Christ prior to the 1000 years, as per Rev 20:4-6. Which was the passage that I did my 15 page exegesis paper on. I'm an Historicist-Premill...but I'm starting to look at Amillenialism a lot. It just seems more and more "right" every time I look at the Scriptures. Yeah, I can't do the Amillenialism thing, primarily because I think it doesn't fit textually within 20:4-6, practically it seems to end up in many of the same places that Dispensationalism does and would seem to indicate that it is by human hands that God's Kingdom will be known on Earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Yeah, I can't do the Amillenialism thing, primarily because I think it doesn't fit textually within 20:4-6, practically it seems to end up in many of the same places that Dispensationalism does and would seem to indicate that it is by human hands that God's Kingdom will be known on Earth.I don't know. Two things make Amill attractive to me. 1. Is there more than one kingdom of God? Isn't that the mistake Jesus said the Jews made (chiliasm)? 2. If the church is now the true Israel of God, which it is according to Romans, then what does that say about the throne of David? It means Jesus must be on it now, since its sitting in lordship over Israel. Its not physical. Now, the problem I have with Amill, which has stopped me so far, is that it is Roman Catholic. :jk: No, its the fact that if its true, then Satan is bound right now. I have never recieved a satisfactory answer to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 I don't know. Two things make Amill attractive to me. 1. Is there more than one kingdom of God? Isn't that the mistake Jesus said the Jews made (chiliasm)? 2. If the church is now the true Israel of God, which it is according to Romans, then what does that say about the throne of David? It means Jesus must be on it now, since its sitting in lordship over Israel. Its not physical. 1. One Kingdom of God, that exists continually, its geography is IMO irrelevant. 2. My understanding of the Kingdom of God is that it is a Kingdom that is "here/and not yet". Meaning yes, Jesus does sit on the throne and while it may not be physically realized yet, it will be. As for the community of faith we are more like displaced nationalists; i.e. a people with no land to call home. Now, the problem I have with Amill, which has stopped me so far, is that it is Roman Catholic. :jk:No, its the fact that if its true, then Satan is bound right now. I have never recieved a satisfactory answer to that. Well, Catholic theology does present some issues for me, and the Christendom model it presupposes is one of them. And you are exactly right about Amill requiring Satan to be bound right now, and this for me is one of the main reasons why Amill simply cannot be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebornempowered Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 No, its the fact that if its true, then Satan is bound right now. I have never recieved a satisfactory answer to that. I want to preface what I am saying by admitting it's not the perfect answer and there is much more to it. "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Matthew 28:18 Part of the problem with pre-mil dispensationalism is that they give way to much power and authority to Satan. The NT tells us to resist the devil and he will flee. Really sounds like a powerful being that is taking over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 I want to preface what I am saying by admitting it's not the perfect answer and there is much more to it. I think they all have problems, just some seem to follow the evidence better IMO. Part of the problem with pre-mil dispensationalism is that they give way to much power and authority to Satan. The NT tells us to resist the devil and he will flee. Really sounds like a powerful being that is taking over. You are quite right, but I would go farther to say that Pre-mil Dispen actually creates a dualism between God and Satan where the Satan is supposedly a real contender in the fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 its a weird discussion.. Those that believe won't listen to YOU. Those that don't won't listen to you. Those that don't care watch both in amazement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 I want to preface what I am saying by admitting it's not the perfect answer and there is much more to it."All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Matthew 28:18 Part of the problem with pre-mil dispensationalism is that they give way to much power and authority to Satan. The NT tells us to resist the devil and he will flee. Really sounds like a powerful being that is taking over. No doubt that people place way too much power in Satan's hands. Yet another reason why I'm Historicist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebornempowered Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 You are quite right, but I would go farther to say that Pre-mil Dispen actually creates a dualism between God and Satan where the Satan is supposedly a real contender in the fight. I was thinking it......you said it. Thanks!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Dude, speak english I can understand. I went to a catholic school, not theological college. I'm just an un edgamacated wrench bender :laugh: . I know what you mean. I was actually removed from catholic Junior High School @ 13 for asking the "wrong" questions about evolution. :laugh: And, my brother....on the other themes taking place between the players (Eschatologist Eschewers including Puttering Preterists, Hopped-up Historicists, Funky Futurists <where are you my little monkeys?>, Insipid Idealists <those charlatans!>) and any eclectic entrepreneurial end-terpreters of Biblical prophecy whose web-sites are yet to be mentioned --- ...in the spirit(ual) of the tailgate, I proffer the portals of inerrant reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_eschatology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism And next time when you're asked "WWJD?", you can answer with a KISS: "Keep It Simple, Stupid" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Hey Jumbo, it was simple until the Dispensationalists showed up 200 years ago. Thanks for nothing John Nelson Darby! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Hey Jumbo, it was simple until the Dispensationalists showed up 200 years ago.Thanks for nothing John Nelson Darby! Well, someone had to warn you that pursuing Partial Preterism paves the path to perdition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Well, someone had to warn you that pursuing Partial Preterism paves the path to perdition Premillenial Partial Preterism, thank you very much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Premillenial Partial Preterism, thank you very much! I'm so socially inept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 And next time when you're asked "WWJD?", you can answer with a KISS: "Keep It Simple, Stupid" WWJD is probably another thing that came out of the Dispie churches.I prefer "What Did Jesus Do?" Its much better to follow Him than to let the intellect attempt to justify actions by presuming to know what He would do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurent Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 "Christians across this nation see this place as a rallying point," he said. They "recognize that we live in a culture that no longer believes the Bible is true." If people no longer believe in the bible it's in part because of religious nuts that focus too much on the literal meaning of the bible rather than applying lessons that can be learned from scripture to the real world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Those that don't care watch both in amazement. :ciao: I can't wait to get nuked for someone's idea of their god's will. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 "Christians across this nation see this place as a rallying point," he said. They "recognize that we live in a culture that no longer believes the Bible is true."If people no longer believe in the bible it's in part because of religious nuts that focus too much on the literal meaning of the bible rather than applying lessons that can be learned from scripture to the real world. Yeah, our local news here today ran the story and they interviewed a guy who said, "I think its a pretty serious accusation to say that the Word of God is a lie." Hellooooo, Mcfly! Of course that's a pretty serious accusation, to bad it doesn't apply here! :redpunch: :tantrum: :hammer: :soapbox: :stick: :rant: :doh1: Typical killing of the Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 hey, whatever turns people towards science... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbiggs Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 You really can't argue with the Creationists...if they can't logically explain something they either blame it on the devil, or they claim that God doesn't want for us to know...how can you logically argue with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbiggs Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 If there wasn't a flood, how do you explain the fossil sea shells found on mountain tops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.