LOL! I believe that the approximate date of authorship will eventually be proven; but at this time I do not believe that it has been proven to have been written before the fall of Jerusalem, as you claim. But I appreciate your support, anyway. LOL!
Frankly, with the sketchy and contradictory "evidence" we have, the date of authorship cannot be proven, one way or the other; and any claims of absolute proof are nothing more than hot air.
>>>Notice, I didn’t include your last over the top words, “good riddance,” it doesn’t sound like something a Christian should say on a forum like this.<<<
So, you finally believe we should band together as "brothers in Christ." When I recall your earlier tirade against Presbyterian Minister and Professor, Dr. Keith Mathison, I find your change of heart refreshing, to say the least.
But, I want to be clear: I believe all Christians should be praying for the day we can say "good riddance" to the false, gloomy doctrines of dispensationalism/futurism.
>>>And, by the way, I’ve told you before, I’ll tell you again, I am not a dispensationalist, futurist, yes, but not dispensationalist.<<<
I am not a preterist, but you continue to insist I am. So take that, dispensationalist! LOL!
>>>It seems to irritate you why I won’t go point by point with you<<<
I know why you won't. You can't. Your doctrine is not defendable.
>>>I certainly could, especially on the early church fathers<<<
I am certain everyone would be thrilled to read your rebuttal of my previous quotes by the early Church Fathers. Maybe you will have a change of heart, so everyone can benefit from your vast wealth of knowledge.
>>>if I thought you a genuine seeder of truth I would, but I don’t waste time with debaters, it is clear to me that all you are is a debater.<<<
I see. You don't like to debate "debaters." Keep looking and I feel confident that one day you will find someone to debate who cannot debate. Mark Hitchcock did! LOL!
Philip
“I am not a preterist, but you continue to insist I am.”
Against my better judgment, fully expecting more of your debate smoke and mirrors, I’ll ask you anyway: you say you are not a preterist, the following is Wikipedia’s description of preterism, sure sounds like you. Please tell us what there is about it that doesn’t describe you?
Preterist’s “Interpret prophecies of the Bible as events which have already happened. Daniel is interpreted as events that happened in the second century BC while Revelation is interpreted as events that happened in the first century AD. Preterism holds that Ancient Israel finds its continuation or fulfillment in the Christian church at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, which is listed in Webster’s 1913 dictionary as a prefix denoting that something is ‘past’ or ‘beyond,’ signifying that either all or a majority of Bible prophecy was fulfilled by AD 70. Adherents of preterism are commonly known as preterists.”