Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | First Century Second Coming? | John 5:19 | Xerxes | 128162 | ||
Hello again Tim. The questions were to provoke to edification. I read the thread of posts with no bias one way or another. I saw a lot of opinions and explanations going both ways, and zero contemplation on either side. How can truth be determined if the group of you discussing a topic cannot be objective? Better a poor and wise youth than an old king beyond correction, right? I know that in my early walk, I was absolutely premillialist. Then someone showed me some things. Because of my firm stance on the one side, I didn't hear what he said. After a few days of contemplation on what he had to say, considering the logic and soundness of his words, I was pursuaded to seek his logic. After a while, I realized that neither theory was sound, and that it was a futile effort to attempt to sway anyone to your particular persuasion. All you can do is offer food for thought and try to provoke those seeking such truths to do so objectively. While I again say that I am of neither persuasion, I can most definitely assert that premillenialism is not based on facts, but the lack of them (i.e. no evidence of the return, no documentation of the tribulation as understood, no documentation on whose name added up to the dreaded number, etc.), and because of predisposed bias, they do not see or hear the preterist argument. They also have a tendency to assign metaphoric meaning to plain passages to support a theory that makes more sense to them than the alternative. The preterist on the other hand base their argument on many historical facts, but they fail to prove the return without spiritualizing it, they are unable to explain pertinent aspects of the Revelation (which require explanations if they truly understand it as they assert), they spiritualize the 1000-year reign because there is no such history to support a time of peace as described in the passages pertaining to the reign. Further, they fail to explain why the persecutions continued beyond 70 AD if Christ had come back to establish his kingdom. So all in all, I'm just trying to provoke the discussion by offering a nonbiased series of questions to make everyone think and edify one another. It is all I have to offer on this subject without provoking instead a measure of strife, which is certainly not my desire or goal, I want to be a part of this community if you would all care to have me. Xerxes |
||||||
2 | First Century Second Coming? | John 5:19 | srbaegon | 128165 | ||
Hello Xerxes, If I might add just a bit to the conversation... Though I am still pre-mill, I have come to understand that the study of eschatology (end times) has more to do with how we are to live in light of Christ's return rather than getting the events in exact historical order. Steve |
||||||
3 | First Century Second Coming? | John 5:19 | Xerxes | 128170 | ||
Steve, "Though I am still pre-mill, I have come to understand that the study of eschatology (end times) has more to do with how we are to live in light of Christ's return rather than getting the events in exact historical order." Agreed. I'm just adding some spice to the conversation to provoke to edification in the seeking of truth. Whether the coming is future or past, what matters is that we are living accordingly so that we are up to the standard of the kingdom if that is where we live, or so that we are ready when he comes. What matters is the day to day, not the tomorrow. Xerxes |
||||||