I personally don't think Preterists are evil or even spreading any kind of pernicious doctrine.
You personally may not but we've seen plenty of heated rhetoric from certain others of your camp, easily enough to match the heated rhetoric from this side.
Every careless word, man, every careless word.
I do not believe that any eschatological system is fundamental to the gospel.
By and large, yes. Jesus will return, the dead will be raised, God will judge the living and the dead. These will happen and are yet future. Hold to that, well and good. You can keep your Larkin charts, I'll ask the occasional impertinent question from the sidelines.
I do think dispensationalism has gospel implications, from the way it splits Jew and Gentile. Not everyone, maybe even not that many, takes it that far, I am aware. (Quix, to his credit, repudiated a particularly egregious example that I dug up.) But it is inherent in the system. That's what I think is important to address. Should I let it go without comment?
Consider: You're aware of the John Hagee controversy, right? Do you find what he said as jarring as I do? Could his comments have come from any camp other than dispensationalism?
(And by the way, we're not all preterists.)
Lee,
I was very disturbed by what Hagee said. I also did additional research and understand what he meant. I still disagree with him, but it isn’t the heresy that it sounds like. He claims that explicit faith in Christ’s atoning sacrifice is how Jew or Gentile are saved. His latest kick about how Jesus didn’t come to be the Messiah and how we can’t blame the Jews for rejecting what He never claimed to be is nowhere near what dispensationalism teaches. It is out in left field somewhere, and it is biblically false. It isn’t dispensationalism that is fueling this. It is itching ears syndrome. And the itching ears he is trying to appease are his Jewish friends. He is biblically, provably wrong.
I do appreciate that some of you have more integrity in thought and Biblical faithfulness than some of the others of such theological camps.
I still feel that even your moderated position is greatly flawed and a spiritual hazard, danger, destructive force.
Like you, I will still feel duty bound to share what I construe to be a much more Biblical, Holy Spirit affirmed perspective.
HAVE A BLESSED THANKSGIVING WITH DEEPENED RELATIONSHIPS IN GOD’S LOVE, PURPOSES, WILL.
Blessings,
Thanks for your kind words, BTW.
I don't why the Gospel would split Jew and Gentile, except that the Jew is made jealous of the Gentile, as God intended (Rom.11).
Jew and Gentile are saved the same way, by faith, through grace, believing that Christ died for their sins and rose again (1Cor.15:3-4)
What the Jews of Christ's day rejected was the idea of a suffering Messiah, before a conquering one. Consider: You're aware of the John Hagee controversy, right? Do you find what he said as jarring as I do? Could his comments have come from any camp other than dispensationalism?
As for Hagee, he is confused, Christ certainly did offer Himself as the Messiah, but a suffering one (lamb of God) and was rejected-'we have no king but Caesar'.
The Jews could not see that their Messiah was to be both a suffering servant and a conquering King.
Even the Apostles had a hard time with this.
Thanks for the link!