5Re: [biblicalapologetics] Re: Preterism
- Mar 5, 2004Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I think R.C. Sproul is a preterist (*not* a "full" preterist I hastily add :-).God bless,Jeremiah----- Original Message -----From: Robert M. Bowman, Jr.Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 10:58 PMSubject: [biblicalapologetics] Re: PreterismWerner,
Many non-Christians argue that the Bible is errant (and even that
Jesus was errant) because the Gospels report Jesus predicting his
return within a generation, a prediction that on a futurist reading
of these eschatological statements would seem to be in error.
Preterists for that reason conclude that straightening out our
understanding of biblical eschatology is important for the defense
of the Bible.
I think they have a point. Furthermore, although I would reject a
full-blown or thoroughgoing preterism (which sees everything in
biblical prophecy as fulfilled by AD 70), I think there is some
partial truth to a preterist reading of some of the Gospel
eschatological statements. In my opinion Christians should be open
to considering on a case by case basis whether particular statements
in the Gospels refer to Christ's resurrection and exaltation, to the
judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70, or to Christ's still future return
in glory to resurrect humanity and judge the world.
In Christ's service,
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>