Friends,
Having just joined CF, and having just been notified that Preterism is restricted to this area, all I really mean to say is "good!"
The issue must have been of great interest, to have generated such an anathema! After all, non-Christians are welcome to post anywhere, it appears.
Surely Preterists were good ministers of the Word to have defended their view in such an overwhelming way that so profoundly effected otherwise charitable Christian brothers and sisters.
Why is it that people are so insecure about these things? The ones who anathematized Preterists from the rest of the forum admit that they see a lot of prophecy fulfilled in the fall of Jerusalem!! There are also many theologians that these Futurist Christians highly respect who taught the the fall of Jerusalem was the fullest fulfillment of the second advent!
(David Brown of the Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary - 1858 - so beloved to Futurist Christians, said this: "The coming of the Lord is his coming in judgment against Jerusalem - to destroy itself and its temple, and set up the gospel kingdom in a manner more palpable and free than could be done while Jerusalem was yet standing. I say this application of the words, as their direct and primary sense, will probably startle those unacquainted with the prophetic style. But all hesitation on the subject will cease if we will but allow the Scripture to be its own interpreter. The statement of our Lord, 'Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till these things be fulfilled' puts it, I think, beyond question that the whole range of the prediction was to have an accomplishment before the then race of human beings should all have died from the face of the earth.")
So, if nothing else, let us discuss just HOW MANY prophecies were fulfilled in the first century. Isn't this entirely reasonable?
Perhaps Futurist Christians cannot attack the Biblical arguments of Preterism using the Bible, finding themselves appealing only to tradition or their upbringing. Perhaps the real reason behind the "anathema" is the bleating of consciences caused by the power of the Word of God has in reveling the errors of their ever-anticipatory theology.
If this is not the case, then they will join in with our discussions in this forum, which will become hot again as iron sharpens iron. If they are too insecure, they will simply try to ignore the discussions. Either way, true Bereans will be edified.
Be that as it may, the discussion MUST continue! Perhaps there is no other area of Christian theology that NEEDS to be hammered out so badly. There has NEVER been any type of church council or broad gathering to address the issue of eschatology in the history of the Church. Unscriptural tradition has simply been passed down from generation to generation.
It takes a lot of hammering, too, considering the amount of tradition that prances around as Biblical truth. So be patient!
Above all, the charity and kindly love will reveal which view is actually based on the gospel, for we will know the truest Christian doctrine by its love.
Anyway, I'm just trying to get the ball rolling again. Feel free to ask questions, or make comments -- especially critical arguments against the view of past fulfillment of Christ's purposes! =)
Having just joined CF, and having just been notified that Preterism is restricted to this area, all I really mean to say is "good!"
The issue must have been of great interest, to have generated such an anathema! After all, non-Christians are welcome to post anywhere, it appears.
Surely Preterists were good ministers of the Word to have defended their view in such an overwhelming way that so profoundly effected otherwise charitable Christian brothers and sisters.
Why is it that people are so insecure about these things? The ones who anathematized Preterists from the rest of the forum admit that they see a lot of prophecy fulfilled in the fall of Jerusalem!! There are also many theologians that these Futurist Christians highly respect who taught the the fall of Jerusalem was the fullest fulfillment of the second advent!
(David Brown of the Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary - 1858 - so beloved to Futurist Christians, said this: "The coming of the Lord is his coming in judgment against Jerusalem - to destroy itself and its temple, and set up the gospel kingdom in a manner more palpable and free than could be done while Jerusalem was yet standing. I say this application of the words, as their direct and primary sense, will probably startle those unacquainted with the prophetic style. But all hesitation on the subject will cease if we will but allow the Scripture to be its own interpreter. The statement of our Lord, 'Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till these things be fulfilled' puts it, I think, beyond question that the whole range of the prediction was to have an accomplishment before the then race of human beings should all have died from the face of the earth.")
So, if nothing else, let us discuss just HOW MANY prophecies were fulfilled in the first century. Isn't this entirely reasonable?
Perhaps Futurist Christians cannot attack the Biblical arguments of Preterism using the Bible, finding themselves appealing only to tradition or their upbringing. Perhaps the real reason behind the "anathema" is the bleating of consciences caused by the power of the Word of God has in reveling the errors of their ever-anticipatory theology.
If this is not the case, then they will join in with our discussions in this forum, which will become hot again as iron sharpens iron. If they are too insecure, they will simply try to ignore the discussions. Either way, true Bereans will be edified.
Be that as it may, the discussion MUST continue! Perhaps there is no other area of Christian theology that NEEDS to be hammered out so badly. There has NEVER been any type of church council or broad gathering to address the issue of eschatology in the history of the Church. Unscriptural tradition has simply been passed down from generation to generation.
It takes a lot of hammering, too, considering the amount of tradition that prances around as Biblical truth. So be patient!
Above all, the charity and kindly love will reveal which view is actually based on the gospel, for we will know the truest Christian doctrine by its love.
Anyway, I'm just trying to get the ball rolling again. Feel free to ask questions, or make comments -- especially critical arguments against the view of past fulfillment of Christ's purposes! =)
