Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Questions for Preterists

Expand Messages
  • Larry Bump
    ... Logical fallacy, stopped reading. The second leg of your syllogism is a complete non-sequitor. It is also not accepted by the preterist camp, and so the
    Message 1 of 4 , Sep 19, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Keith Dotzler wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > _*INTRODUCTION*_
      >
      > The entire foundation of the Praeterist interpretation is that certain
      > key prophecies were written specifically for the first generation of
      > Christians, in order to instruct them, warn them, and give them
      > confidence in God’s prophetic word. The Praeterist interpretation
      > therefore suffers if it cannot be demonstrated that the earliest
      > Christians understood these prophecies in the way that the Praeterist
      > claims they were intended to. The Praeterist argues:
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >

      Logical fallacy, stopped reading.
      The second leg of your syllogism is a complete non-sequitor. It is also
      not accepted by the preterist camp, and so the entire argument is void.

      By the same "logic" you can prove that the OT prophecies about Jesus
      weren't really about Him because the Jews didn't see them that way.
      That is exactly the same logic.
    • Keith Dotzler
      By the same logic you can prove that the OT prophecies about Jesus weren t really about Him because the Jews didn t see them that way. That is exactly the
      Message 2 of 4 , Sep 20, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        By the same "logic" you can prove that the OT prophecies about Jesus
        weren't really about Him because the Jews didn't see them that way.
        That is exactly the same logic.
         
         
         
        ALL Jews weren't oblivious to the prophecies concerning Christ.  There were Jews who recognized the Messiah as the fulfillment of prophecy.  Some of these Jews even testified of Christ's fulfillment of prophecy in writing.  You'll find these writings within the New Testament, as well as in the writings of those who succeeded the apostles, their disciples, the disciples of their disciples, and so on.   
         
         
        Contrarily, no expositions from any of the early Christians reveal any sort of adherance to a Preterist understanding of the Revelation.  This means the prophecies of the Revelation came and went in the first century, without a single soul understanding them until some 1500+ years later...an idea completely unscriptural, moronic, and opposite of what Preterists teach.  
         
         
        Gentry, Chilton, Gleason and others say that the Revelation was written TO first century Christians, FOR first century Christians, and was meant to be understood by same.  Preterists clamour and wail about John's use of the adverbs "quickly," "shortly," etc. as proof that first century Christians would have understood these words to mean the prophecies were applicable to their generation. 
         
         
        Where is the proof that any 1st century Christian, or, for that matter, ANY Christian from the first millennium, adhered to a Preterist interpretation of the Apocalypse?  If none can be produced, the Preterist scheme itself is a non sequitur!
         
         
         
         
         


        --- On Sat, 9/19/09, Larry Bump <lbump@...> wrote:

        From: Larry Bump <lbump@...>
        Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Questions for Preterists
        To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Saturday, September 19, 2009, 7:50 PM

         
        Keith Dotzler wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > _*INTRODUCTION* _
        >
        > The entire foundation of the Praeterist interpretation is that certain
        > key prophecies were written specifically for the first generation of
        > Christians, in order to instruct them, warn them, and give them
        > confidence in God’s prophetic word. The Praeterist interpretation
        > therefore suffers if it cannot be demonstrated that the earliest
        > Christians understood these prophecies in the way that the Praeterist
        > claims they were intended to. The Praeterist argues:
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >

        Logical fallacy, stopped reading.
        The second leg of your syllogism is a complete non-sequitor. It is also
        not accepted by the preterist camp, and so the entire argument is void.

        By the same "logic" you can prove that the OT prophecies about Jesus
        weren't really about Him because the Jews didn't see them that way.
        That is exactly the same logic.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.