Biblical Minimalism and "The History of Preterism" : The Silent History of Dispensationalism

Preterist Archive ^ | Gary DeMar

[topcat54]

Since you seem like a semi-intelligent futurist, perhaps you can answer my question that I've posed to others but have not gotten any response.

[Begin quote]

If we define a premillennialist as one who believe that Christ will physically reign on the earth for a thousand years after the second coming and resurrection, what specific evidence would you use to substantiate the premil position in the early church?

I have not gotten an answer to this question.

In reviewing some on the ancient writers who are listed as supporting the premillenarian position, I could not find anything that could identify with this modern definition.

E.g., in Justin Martyr, we read:

But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, [as] the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare. (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, Chapter LXXX)

Now we have understood that the expression used among these words, ‘According to the days of the tree [of life] shall be the days of my people; the works of their toil shall abound’ obscurely predicts a thousand years. For as Adam was told that in the day he ate of the tree he would die, we know that he did not complete a thousand years. We have perceived, moreover, that the expression, ‘The day of the Lord is as a thousand years,’ is connected with this subject. And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place. Just as our Lord also said, ‘They shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be equal to the angels, the children of the God of the resurrection.’ (Dialogue, Chapter LXXXI)

You will note that in these two rather well-known “premillennial” statements there is absolutely no mention of Christ physically on the earth during the thousand years. One can certainly read one’s biases into the statement and come to that reading, but they do not literally teach what modern premillenarians teach.

[End quote]

[caww]

Nonsense again.

[topcat54]

And who among the ANFs gives the book of Revelation the early date the preterists need in order to give that book any kind of prophetic legitimacy?

Actually, Gentry has addressed that topic in his book, Before Jerusalem Fell. Dating the Book of Revelation . See chapter 6. I also found a interesting article, NERO ANTICHRIST: Patristic Evidence of the Use of Nero’s Name in Calculating the Number of the Beast .

[topcat54]

In the several posts I have made here I have asked numerous questions for which you have no answer.

You mean these “are you still beating your wife” questions?

So I ask the question, TC a) what exactly is the purpose of your thread? b) Do you think the cleaver Gary DeMar is making fools out of the dispensationalist crowd? c) Are you trying to impress us with your grasp of the various theological positions? d) Are you on a crusade to rid the world of pre-mil theology? e) Is your ministry the effort to prove that you are smarter than the writers of the Left Behind Series?

OK, if it helps.

a) Truth.
b) Yes (but he's not a cleaver).
c) Absolutely.
d) Ditto.
e) Obviously.

Is that better?

[topcat54]

[Thomas] Ice gives the false impression to his readers that there is a large body of written material on the subject of eschatology composed by first-century writers. It's odd that Ice never quotes from one of these first-century documents to prove his point. In fact, he never tells us what first-century documents he has in mind or their subject matter. Of course, the reason Ice doesn't quote these documents is that they do not teach what he needs them to teach.

...

Ice and LaHaye get off on the wrong foot in their analysis of preterism. The historical argument is a death blow, or to use Mark Hitchcock's metaphor from his chapter on the dating of Revelation, "A Stake in the Heart" to their brand of futurism. The earliest historical sources, the Didache, the testimony of James, the brother of Jesus, and 1 Clement demonstrate that preterism's history is a first-century history.

( Biblical Minimalism and "The History of Preterism", Part 2)

[fatboy]

You Sir started this thread in an attempt to give preterism a much needed boost by trying to denigrate dispensationalism. If you desire a debate on the truth of pre-mil theology then start a new thread. You have given me ample proof that you are not interested in an honest discussion.

I mentioned this in an earlier post and you promptly muddied the waters by introducing Lutheran theology but again, before you can be a preterist you must be a Covenant Theology hobbiest. I say some critical things about Riddlebarger but he and I do agree on one thing and that is preterism has issues. For me there is not a whole lot motivation to prove/disprove a fine point (preterism) of a whole system (Covenant Theology) that I don't agree with, especially with an individual such as yourself that, to be quite honest, is simply not listening to me. I and a few others here have tried to prod you into answering some simple questions to you and your response is to ignore or employ bombast. The only reason I have let it go this long is due to the fact that I suffered a spiral tib/fib fracture of my left leg and I have very little else to do right now. It's this or watch TV, neither one is very appealing.

You seem to place a lot of weight on your personal experience. That's fine, let me give you just a little bit of mine. I started my study of the Bible in 1977 while at college. At that point I was a reformed CT believer because all of the people I knew and the church I went to was reformed CT. I even spent a week at Ligonier Study Center in winter of 1980. I know first hand the high IQ of the Sproul’s. Years later I became a Lutheran and guess what, no more reformed for me, I found a new truth. Then I became a Baptist and started actually studying the various different viewpoints.

I don't say this to impress you or anyone else. I read books like DeMar during my lunch break. My personal library has over a 1000 books on just theology, just about every book in the foot notes in the article in your OP I actually own. Im not a pastor or seminary trained and have no financial interest in any particular theological position. There is probably little about end-times you can teach me. Call me a snob, I don't care but your attempts are so light weight that it is hard to take you seriously.

[topcat54]

There is help for people in your condition.

OK, be honest, when was the last time you read or listened to any non-dispensationalist comment on the book of Revelation to any great extent?

[fatboy]

PS topcat54.2,

I'm allowed to make a few spelling mistakes because I have been on pain killers for 12 days, had a plate and 10 screws put in my leg last Thursday. That doesn't change the fact that your trying to promote an agenda thinly disguised as a debate.

[topcat54]

You Sir started this thread in an attempt to give preterism a much needed boost by trying to denigrate dispensationalism.

More of the latter and less of the former. Dispensationalism is an easy target for the biblically literate.

You have given me ample proof that you are not interested in an honest discussion.

I'm sure I have.

I mentioned this in an earlier post and you promptly muddied the waters by introducing Lutheran theology but again

You made a claim that was not factually defensible. I pointed that out by demonstrating the contrary view.

I say some critical things about Riddlebarger but he and I do agree on one thing and that is preterism has issues.

Any enemy of my enemy is my friend, kinda. It must be hard to pick your friends when most of them have such low opinions of dispensationalism. I'm a lightweight next to Riddlebarger and other non-preterist CTs.

You seem to place a lot of weight on your personal experience.

Not really. It is what it is. I'm more comfortable presenting the truth of Scripture.

There is probably little about end-times you can teach me. Call me a snob, I don't care but your attempts are so light weight that it is hard to take you seriously.

Your background is much the same as mine (I started in 1973), except just the opposite. After conversion I got heavy into the dispie things. Hal Lindsey and Co. was all the rage among my friends. Attended independent and charismatic/pentecostal churches where dispie-ism was officially taught. Bought Larry Norman records (“There's no time to change your mind, the Son has come and you've been left behind”). After a few years of this I got dragged kicking and screaming into a Presbyterian church. Something about the teaching was different. They didn't need charts to teach the Bible. They were not obsessed with “end times.” They taught the whole counsel of God. I was hooked. I have a room full of theology books of all stripes.

I guess that makes us both snobs.

[topcat54]

That doesn't change the fact that your trying to promote an agenda thinly disguised as a debate.

I've been around these parts since 1999 and I don't think I've ever made a secret of my agenda wrt dispensationalism. Nor have I tried to. It's a fraudulent theology that needs to be eradicated by any morally legitimate means. It's a menace to the Church of Jesus Christ, and has been a blight for the last 180 years.

Riddlebarger, DeMar, Gentry, and a “multitude which no man could number” of other non-dispies agree.

[fatboy]

tophat54 said to fishtank: OK, be honest, when was the last time you read or listened to any non-dispensationalist comment on the book of Revelation to any great extent?

I can't speak for fishtank but you haven't mentioned one single book that I don't have on my bookshelves. Listening to you is like reading one of the books you reference. I have read those books and hence know exactly where you are getting your information from.

You make my point better than I make it, that is most foes of dispensationalism quote other foes of dispensationalism instead of the dispensationalist themselves. Get some source material into your program, you will be a better person for it.

[The Theophilus]

...lets debate continuity/discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments. But that is a debate you will not be having for years, if ever...

Off to the kitchen to make some pop-corn. I hope this discussion takes place soon. So much better than the food-fights.

[fatboy]

topcat54 said : Dispensationalism is an easy target for the biblically literate.

fatboy replies: Have a nice evening Sir.

[topcat54]

I would like to make one change. When you asked, d) Are you on a crusade to rid the world of pre-mil theology? I said “ditto (absolutely).” In fact, I do not consider historic (covenantal) premillennialism to be a significant error or hindrance to the gospel. It has its problems, but they are minor compared to the errors of classic and neo-classic dispensationalism. So, I do not actually wish to see the world eradicated of premillennialism per se, just the dispensational variety.

[topcat54]

I can't speak for fishtank but you haven't mentioned one single

FT was encouraging me to listen to J. Vernon McGee's dispensational audio commentary on the book of Revelation. I told him that I would rather be treated to a round of root canal. (The tune hasn't changed in 40+ years. They just swap out a few words here and there and put a new date on the songsheet. The dispensational way.) His response suggested that I had some social disease or something. That was the context of my quote here.

[topcat54]

Off to the kitchen to make some pop-corn. I hope this discussion takes place soon. So much better than the food-fights.

Don't hold your breathe. I would be interested in an answer to my question. Not sure if that's gonna happen either.

[The Theophilus]

Quix,
I don’t mean this as an insult, its just that not everyone is a player, some are born to be spectators.

Given your wild enthusiasm and colorful ways of expressing yourself you remind me of the guy who shows up drunk to the football games in the freezing cold wearing only body-paint, a frizzy rainbow wig, and a giant foam rubber “#1” glove. You are the one that shouts until your voice is hoarse, waving the “D” or the fence signs, screaming PG-rated obscenities and trash-talks when the opposing team is on the field yet you are the first one to high-five your team when they make a play.

The world needs people like you. You add color and life and make us laugh. You obvious love the game but quite frankly, you would make a lousy player and even worse coach. So recognize that your role is Super Fan.

Because that is all I see you as.

[Quix]

Thanks for the elaboration.

FWIW, BTW,

I’ve never had an OVERINFLATED

understanding of your perceptual skills nor of your criteria for such things.

I try to play, primarily, for one oberver, and HIM ALONE.

Thankfully, HE makes HIS pleasure in how HE’S created, trained, educated, taught, and conditioned me quite clear, on occasion. And that makes all the difference in the world.

That means that the noise and spilled popcorn from the peanut gallery are not very significant bothers at all.

[Quix]

“. . . I don’t mean this as an insult, . . . “

Hmmmmmm Perhaps Sam’s club will have a special on cases of personal insight this week. You might check and see.

. . .

. . .

Thanks for the elaboration.

FWIW, BTW,

I’ve never had an OVERINFLATED

understanding of your perceptual skills nor of your criteria for such things.

I try to play, primarily, for one oberver, and HIM ALONE.

Thankfully, HE makes HIS pleasure in how HE’S created, trained, educated, taught, and conditioned me quite clear, on occasion. And that makes all the difference in the world.

That means that the noise and spilled popcorn from the peanut gallery are not very significant bothers at all.

[GiovannaNicoletta]

Thanks for the ping, Quix.

The bottom line, and the only thing that matters, is that preterists can point to not one verse of Scripture to support preterism.

Therefore, it remains a man-made construct that is just one false doctrine of thousands, and, as we see from the fact that people are beginning to use RFID implanted chips to make purchases, the Bible is, once again, confirmed as inerrant and true just as God wrote it and not as fallen men have re-defined it, and remains standing despite every attempt man has made to undermine it and deny it.

The desperate, sad attempts to keep this preterism garbage alive and kicking would be hilarious if it didn't carry such tragic consequences for so many people.