>>>Philip, someone raised a valid point. If no one believes as you do then that is a very good indicator you are in error.<<<
Everything is possible. But, there is also a bright side: there is no such thing as a cult of one. LOL!.
I assume you do not read a lot of commentaries. Those fellows are all over the place.
>>>Interesting synopsis of Kenneth Gentry which explains where he and the other preterists came from. “A number of other reconstructionists were also students at Reformed Seminary during this time and they also became advocates of postmillennial preterism under Dr. Bahnsen’s tutelage. They include: Gary DeMar, the late David Chilton, and James Jordan.” Developer of a new postmillennial preterism<<<
I have read some of Gary Demar’s articles. I am familiar with Bahnsen’s name, but I don’t recall reading anything by him: maybe a footnote or two: I don’t recall. I don’t believe I have heard of James Jordan.
Understand: I had heard of virtually no one in this realm until last summer. I didn’t even know what a Scofield Bible was. The first book I read in the commentary/research area was by Philip Mauro (cause I liked the name -:)
Philip
"It is in this work that he argues for an early date (pre-A.D. 70) of the giving of the Book of Revelation to the Apostle John. This is a necessary component for the preterist theory."
What the author doesn't tell you is dispensationalism: all futurism, for that matter, is in the same boat. If it is proven (and I believe it is) that the Revelation was written before 70 A.D., the entire dispensational house of cards comes crashing down, along with that enormous end-times book industry built on doom and gloom.
Here's more:
"Further, a natural, proper reading of the Book of Revelation, even though it uses symbols, has Christ returning physically in Revelation 19:11-21, just like He said in Acts 1:9-11, and then setting up His 1,000 year reign upon planet earth upon that return.?
Notice how the author provides no proof whatsoever that Christ returns physically to earth. He actually spiritualized Rev 19:11-21 and pretended he didn't. Spiritualization is the only way he could pretend Christ physically returns to earth. Not once in the entire chapter is Christ, or his armies, said to be on earth. For example:
"And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean." (Rev 19:14 KJV)
Another "return to earth" myth perpetuated by futurists is their spiritualization of Acts 1:9-11. Let's look at the text carefully:
"And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." (Acts 1:9-11 KJV)
What does that really say? It says, "when Christ returns from heaven, he returns in a cloud." Not once does it say he returns to earth. In fact, in all references to his coming, Christ indicated he would come in "clouds," in one manner or another. But he never said he would return physically to earth. One would think such an important event would have many references. But there are none.
The author finishes the article with the same tired misdirection:
"Preterism rises and falls upon the validity of their so-called "time texts.""
And so does dispensationalism.
Philip