Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Preterist interpretation of this verse. | Luke 21:32 | Morant61 | 51379 | ||
Greetings Treadway! The term 'preterist' is usually used in reference to understanding the prophecies of Revelation, but can refer to all prophecy. Those who hold this view believe that all of Revelation pertains only to the first century. Thus, none of the prophecies refer to future events, but only describe the conditions in the 1st century. So, the emphasis in the preterist view is not that prophecy will be fulfilled soon, but that all the prophecies pertain only to the 1st century. Indeed, they are really prophecies at all, only descriptions of the current conditions of the church. Needless to say, I reject this view! Concerning your verses, the words 'soon', 'near', ect..., can have different meanings in different contexts. What I mean is that not all of them refer to the end of time. Some references refer to His death and resurrection. Some refer to the revelation of Dan. 7:14. Some refer to the transfiguration. Some refer to future generations. We would have to look at the context of each passage in order to deal with them correctly. One thing is obvious though, many believe that most of the NT books were written after 70 a.d. (I personally believe that the majority were written prior to then). But, if this is the case, why would they include references which were supposed to indicate that Christ would return within 40 years, when 40 years had already past? Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
2 | Preterist interpretation of this verse. | Luke 21:32 | Treadway | 51388 | ||
Hello Tim: You ask: "Why would they include references which were supposed to indicate that Christ would return within 40 years, when 40 years had already past?" Let's assume that your belief, that the "majority" of the NT was written prior to 70 AD is true. That would be a blow struck for the view that "soon", "near", mean exactly what the literal accepted meanings are for those words. As far as the belief that "most" of the NT was written after 70 AD, I'd need to see the sources for that. I don't think Paul's letters, Peter's letters would fall into that category. Also, why would Mark fit, when the the destroying of the temple happened in 70 AD? However, John would seem to be written well after 70 AD, don't you think? And as I suggested, there aren't too many mentions of "soon" or "near" in John. And Revelation was probably written well after 70 AD. What was on the mind of the Revelation's author may be anyone's guess. I don't know. As far as "context", perhaps the most important would be that of Paul and Peter. Paul, especially, since he was the direct messenger, and should have known better than anyone. Their comments certainly suggest to me, at least, that they were expecting the return in their lifetimes. My bottom line would be merely not to dismiss, in total, all of the pronouncements, including those of Jesus. And I could only "reject" if the evidence was "beyond a reasonable doubt". I don't think, as of yet, it all measures up to that standand, and "out of hand" rejection is not where I would go. Not yet, anyway....thanks for the preterist info...Treadway |
||||||