The Appeal of Preterism

[Revelationist]

An great overview.

[Sean]

Sorry guys to break up your preterist pow wow with negativity. Couldnt resist getting involved a little....LOL

A favorite argument among preterists is that the book of Revelation was written prior to A.D. 70, and hence the book must have been fulfilled in A.D. 70 when Rome overran Jerusalem. Futurists point out, however, that some of the earliest church Fathers confirmed a late date, including Irenaeus (who knew Polycarp, John’s disciple) who claimed the book was written at the close of the reign of Domitian (which took place from A.D. 81—96). Victorinus confirmed this date in the third century, as did Eusebius (263-340). Hence, since the book was written after A.D. 70, it could hardly have been referring to events that would be fulfilled in A.D. 70.

Against preterism, futurists note that key events described in the book of Revelation simply did not occur in A.D. 70. For example, in A.D. 70 “a third of mankind” was not killed, as predicted in Revelation 9:18. Nor has “every living creature in the sea died,” as predicted in Revelation 16:3. In order to explain these texts, preterists must resort to an allegorical interpretation since they did not happen literally.

[Monterrey]

[QUOTE=Sean;1320499]Sorry guys to break up your preterist pow wow with negativity. Couldnt resist getting involved a little....LOL
[QUOTE]

Now you have to go and repent, you are not sorry, not even a little!

LOL

[Sean]

Pray for me bro........LOL(if I was sorry I would not have done it)...LOL

[Dante]

I don't need fancy charts or teleological arguments to prove preterism. It is what it is, and truth speaks for itself.

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by Sean

Sorry guys to break up your preterist pow wow with negativity. Couldnt resist getting involved a little....LOL

A favorite argument among preterists is that the book of Revelation was written prior to A.D. 70, and hence the book must have been fulfilled in A.D. 70 when Rome overran Jerusalem. Futurists point out, however, that some of the earliest church Fathers confirmed a late date, including Irenaeus (who knew Polycarp, John’s disciple) who claimed the book was written at the close of the reign of Domitian (which took place from A.D. 81—96). Victorinus confirmed this date in the third century, as did Eusebius (263-340). Hence, since the book was written after A.D. 70, it could hardly have been referring to events that would be fulfilled in A.D. 70.

Against preterism, futurists note that key events described in the book of Revelation simply did not occur in A.D. 70. For example, in A.D. 70 “a third of mankind” was not killed, as predicted in Revelation 9:18. Nor has “every living creature in the sea died,” as predicted in Revelation 16:3. In order to explain these texts, preterists must resort to an allegorical interpretation since they did not happen literally.

A favorite argument among futurists is the Book of Revelation was written After AD70, and hence the book must be fulfilled after AD 70. lol

Do bare in mind, not all church fathers agreed to the premise that it was written after AD70. True, some did, but some is not the whole. The most common person quoted, didn't seem to have the greatest math skills or at least failed to report accurately.
"Here Irenaeus claims an *apostolic tradition*, barely a century after the ministry of the apostles (and less, in the case of John), that claims that Jesus was more than 50 years of age at His death."
Does anyone here support his math on the age of Jesus? If not, why use him as an authority on the age of the Book of Revelation? We have to admit, it is difficult to get a definite historical account as to when it was written, so if internal evidence can be used to support either side, then it could be considered. Everyone must claim certain things are symbolic, idioms or metaphors it's just how to determine what is and what is not.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Rome is the city with seven hills in Rev 17-18!! I agree. The HARLOT sits on the SEVEN HEADED beast. THE SEVEN HEADS are not part of the woman but the beast whom the woman sits upon. And the woman is JERUSALEM and the BEAST WITH SEVEN HEADS/HILLS is Rome. But it is not the ROMAN Catholic church, which was NEVER a bride of God to begin with as the harlot is accused of being. The BEAST IS PAGAN ROME with its Caesars who Jerusalem cried out to be their king instead of Jesus. ROME was in league with the Jews throughout Acts to persecute the church.

Jerusalem is the whore.

Isa 1:21 KJV How is the faithful city become an harlot! it was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now murderers.

How can ROME be that?

Read Ezekiel 16. See JERUSALEM called a harlot time and time again!

If you BASE the identity of the HARLOT on the BIBLE, comparing Bible with Bible, JERUSALEM is the only entity that comes to the surface.

Jesus said JERUSALEM was guilty of all blood shed on earth, and that is what was found in the Harlot in Rev 18:24. TWO ENTITIES CANNOT BE GUILTY OF ALL OF THE SAME THING. In Matt 23, JESUS identified the harlot of Rev for us! She is the GREAT CITY where our Lord was crucified!

Rev 11:8 KJV And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

Still a slam-dunk, even if I say so myself. lololol

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Rome is the city with seven hills in Rev 17-18!! I agree. The HARLOT sits on the SEVEN HEADED beast. THE SEVEN HEADS are not part of the woman but the beast whom the woman sits upon. And the woman is JERUSALEM and the BEAST WITH SEVEN HEADS/HILLS is Rome. But it is not the ROMAN Catholic church, which was NEVER a bride of God to begin with as the harlot is accused of being. The BEAST IS PAGAN ROME with its Caesars who Jerusalem cried out to be their king instead of Jesus. ROME was in league with the Jews throughout Acts to persecute the church.

Jerusalem is the whore.

Isa 1:21 KJV How is the faithful city become an harlot! it was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now murderers.

How can ROME be that?

Read Ezekiel 16. See JERUSALEM called a harlot time and time again!

If you BASE the identity of the HARLOT on the BIBLE, comparing Bible with Bible, JERUSALEM is the only entity that comes to the surface.

Jesus said JERUSALEM was guilty of all blood shed on earth, and that is what was found in the Harlot in Rev 18:24. TWO ENTITIES CANNOT BE GUILTY OF ALL OF THE SAME THING. In Matt 23, JESUS identified the harlot of Rev for us! She is the GREAT CITY where our Lord was crucified!

Rev 11:8 KJV And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

Mike, if you will but carefully examine an outline of the city limits of Jerusalem at the time of Christ, you'll find that the place "where also our Lord was crucified" was NOT within its boundaries, rather the site of Calvary was northeast of the city.

Moreover, the phrase "street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt," should be recognized as speaking of the "whole world," for it will be there, scattered in every place imaginable, that the slain saints of the coming Anti-Christ and his deceived followers, will be found when God allows him to "make war with the saints and overcome them" during the last days.

Now I know that you, as an advocate of preterist doctrine do not accept this as truth, but I write and post this for the sake of those of us who do believe in the prophecy which tells of the coming of this "man of sin" and of his "war" with the saints.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Mike, if you will but carefully examine an outline of the city limits of Jerusalem at the time of Christ, you'll find that the place "where also our Lord was crucified" was NOT within its boundaries, rather the site of Calvary was northeast of the city.

Moreover, the phrase "street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt," should be recognized as speaking of the "whole world," for it will be there, scattered in every place imaginable, that the slain saints of the coming Anti-Christ and his deceived followers, will be found when God allows him to "make war with the saints and overcome them" during the last days.

Now I know that you, as an advocate of preterist doctrine do not accept this as truth, but I write and post this for the sake of those of us who do believe in the prophecy which tells of the coming of this "man of sin" and of his "war" with the saints.

The scripture refers to Jerusalem when it mentioned where our Lord was crucified. Everyone agrees with that. It does not have to be within the confines of the city walls. Hebrews 13 says it was outside Jerusalem. But it was close enough to be considered that city. It was just outside the walls. So it it's too weak an argument to say the city Jerusalem was not in view.

What other great city was where Jesus was crucified if not Jerusalem? The world? So the great city we read of later on in the book that is the harlot is the world?

Read the bible and see the bible calls Jerusalem a Harlot many times as I've shown.

Jesus said Jerusalem was guilty of all blood. Jesus said that. The same we read in revelation 18:24. You really have to reach to avoid that connection.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Sean

Well whatever you decide to believe in the middle of the road. It needs a name...howabout dramatic/cyclicism?

Or, the naming in and of itself might be taken as a sign of human thinking, and thus straying. I'm with TJJJ-just say 'no'