Quote:
Originally Posted by tcalbrecht  Well, with all due respect, if you are going to critique a position you should be able to articulate that position without creating a strawman, such as the author has done. He seems to either be unfamiliar with or deliberately avoided many of the argument for the preterism view wrt the phrase “this generation”.
I must be missing something. How is it “shameful” to quote Josephus to document what happened in AD70, but not “shameful” to declare the Pope to be the “antichrist” based on historical documents?
Do you think the Pope==antichrist view is based entirely on the Bible alone? |
How does a view that I might have that you think is outside the Scriptures justify you having a source outside the Scriptures?
Anyways, when did I say the Pope was the antichrist? I do not believe that just the Pope is the antichrist. 1 John makes it clear to us who the 'antichrist' is.
Quote:
|
Well, perhaps you are missing something. If you overly spiritualize the text and begin with the presupposition that “generation” means something other than a normal human generation, then you will obviously miss something.
|
I am not presupposing anything! I am new to these things, and I have an open mind. I have only been a Christian for 8 months. The word generation is used many times throughout the Bible and it is impossible in many of the cases for it to mean just the people standing there when he said it. It is used many times as a generation of evil vs us, the chosen generation. Do a keyword search on biblegateway for generation, and read all the results.
My biggest beef is that all the things in Matthew 24 did not take place in that generation as you suppose. So one must either accept the folly of full pretorism or not be it at all.
I do not want to cause strife here. I will not let differing view of prophecy come in the way of my Christ likeness, and I am sorry if I have.
In Christ,