Free Republic

Those who are willing to acknowledge the global context of Revelation have much evidence to support such a view. Those who are determined to shoe-horn Revelation back into the events of A.D. 70 are unlikely to be swayed by our evidence. Thankfully, we need not be overly concerned about the persistence of preterism because the plain meaning of the Biblical text stands opposed to its foundational teachings. As long as Bible students take the text at face value--as it was intended to be understood--then preterism will continue to face an uphill battle. To this fact we owe thanks to the...

The contemporary evangelical world is engulfed in the idea that the church is presently experiencing the messianic kingdom. The idea of the "kingdom" can be bewildering, especially considering how this term is loosely bandied about by today's evangelicals. Many ministries convey the notion that the kingdom is strictly a spiritual and present reality by indicating that they are "expanding the kingdom" through their evangelistic and missionary endeavors. Even Christian political activists sometimes argue that they are "bringing in the kingdom." ... when rightly understood, the "Disciples' Prayer" consists of three requests for the kingdom to come and three additional requests...

To summarize what Replacement Theology (such as Covenantal Post-Millennialists and Covenant Amillennialism) teaches on the issue of the Land and Israel’s restoration to the Land, they present three different positions. First, that the Land promises were fulfilled under Joshua based on Joshua 11:23. The dispensational response will be presented later in this paper. The second view is that the Land promises were fulfilled under David and Solomon. It will be shown later in the paper that the prophecies of a final restoration were made well after the time of David and Solomon. The third view is that all the restoration...

While it is true that the millennium (that is, one thousand years) is found only in Revelation 20, the belief in the Messianic Kingdom does not rest on this passage alone. In fact, it hardly rests on it at all. The basis for the belief in the Messianic Kingdom is twofold. First: there are the unfulfilled promises of the Jewish covenants, promises that can only be fulfilled in a Messianic Kingdom. Second: there are the unfulfilled prophecies of the Jewish prophets. There are numerous prophecies of the Old Testament that speak of the coming of the Messiah Who will reign...

As one evaluates the current debate between dispensationalism and nondispensationalism, the pervading notion seems to be that dispensationalism is in the midst of an identity crisis. While as a whole the evangelical community is seeking for some common ground in eschatology, certainly a worthy aim, this paper seeks to contribute some understanding to the essence of dispensationalism ...

Kenneth L Gentry, Jr., makes evidence derived from exegetical data of the Apocalypse his major focus in building a case for dating Revelation prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Even though acknowledging that other advocates of either a Neronic and Domitianic date for Revelation's composition find no direct evidence within the book for assigning a date, he proceeds to find "inherently suggestive and positively compelling historical time-frame indicators in Revelation." He uses the contemporary reign of the sixth king in 17:9-11 and the integrity of the temple and Jerusalem in 11:1-13 to exemplify arguments that are "virtually...

Preterists teach that the Book of Revelation is primarily a prophecy about the Roman war against the Jews in Israel that began in A.D. 67 and ended with the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70. In order for Revelation to be a prediction of the future (Rev. 1:1, 3, 11, 19; 22:6-10, 16, 18-20) and if it was fulfilled by August A.D. 70, then it had to have been written by A.D. 65 or 66 for the preterist interpretation to even be a possibility. Preterist Ken Gentry has noted this major weakness when he said of fellow early date...

Last year I presented a paper to this body regarding the Jewish historian Josephus’ understanding of the Olivet Discourse and the Fall of Jerusalem and particularly how Preterists had written about Josephus’ recording of the event. ... As I demonstrated last year, little if any of Josephus’ description satisfies the words of our Lord in His discourse. ... is there support for this type of understanding of the Fall of Jerusalem and the predictions of Christ within the writings of the Church that follows A.D. 70? Did the Church Fathers of the ensuing centuries look back on A.D. 70 as...

Just an internal poll, what will the market do at 10:05 this morning when the Obamacare decision is handed down? 1. If Obamacare is upheld? 2. If Obamacare is completely struck down? 3. Only the mandate is struck down?

In 1989, a well-known spokesman for the theonomist camp, Kenneth L. Gentry, published a work devoted to proving that John the Apostle wrote Revelation during the sixties of the first century A.D. Basing his position heavily on Rev 17:9-11 and 11:1-13, he used internal evidence within the book as his principal argument for the early date. ... Inconsistency marks Gentry's hermeneutical pattern. Predisposition keeps him from seeing the book's theme verse as a reference to Christ's second coming. His explanation of Rev 17:9-11 is fraught with weaknesses, as is his discussion of 11:1-2. Two major flaws mar Gentry's discussion of...

Kenneth L Gentry, Jr., makes evidence derived from exegetical data of the Apocalypse his major focus in building a case for dating Revelation prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Even though acknowledging that other advocates of either a Neronic and Domitianic date for Revelation's composition find no direct evidence within the book for assigning a date, he proceeds to find "inherently suggestive and positively compelling historical time-frame indicators in Revelation." He uses the contemporary reign of the sixth king in 17:9-11 and the integrity of the temple and Jerusalem in 11:1-13 to exemplify arguments that are "virtually...

Preterists teach that the Book of Revelation is primarily a prophecy about the Roman war against the Jews in Israel that began in A.D. 67 and ended with the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70. In order for Revelation to be a prediction of the future (Rev. 1:1, 3, 11, 19; 22:6-10, 16, 18-20) and if it was fulfilled by August A.D. 70, then it had to have been written by A.D. 65 or 66 for the preterist interpretation to even be a possibility. Preterist Ken Gentry has noted this major weakness when he said of fellow early date...

As one evaluates the current debate between dispensationalism and nondispensationalism, the pervading notion seems to be that dispensationalism is in the midst of an identity crisis. While as a whole the evangelical community is seeking for some common ground in eschatology, certainly a worthy aim, this paper seeks to contribute some understanding to the essence of dispensationalism in a day when the very term has been brought into question by those within dispensational circles. In particular this paper will attempt to articulate the essence of dispensationalism in hermeneutical terms. Earl Radmacher noted that "literal interpretation is the 'bottom-line' of dispensationalism."...

Grand Rapids Baptist Seminary prof David Turner discussed the literal hermeneutic issue that traditionally is seen as a defining difference between covenant theology and dispensationalism. He noted, however, that its actual use in specific textual situations was determined by the presuppositions of the exegete, not by an arbitrarily chosen hermeneutical system. So we see an emerging awareness that dispensational and covenant theologies differ because of deep rooted presuppositions. The trick is to define where they are and what they are. In the following sections I will attempt to contrast the "classical" forms of each system to discover their different senses...