Originally posted by Littlejoe
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Eschatology 201 Guidelines
This area of the forum is primarily for Christian theists to discuss orthodox views of Eschatology. Other theist participation is welcome within that framework, but only within orthodoxy. Posts from nontheists that do not promote atheism or seek to undermine the faith of others will be permitted at the Moderator's discretion - such posters should contact the area moderators before posting.
Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.
However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.
End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.
Millennialism- post-, pre- a-
Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.
From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.
OK folks, let's roll!
Forum Rules: Here
Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.
However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.
End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.
Millennialism- post-, pre- a-
Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.
From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.
OK folks, let's roll!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Are We Approaching The End Times?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Thoughtful Monk View PostHey, seanD and Littlejoe, your conversation is interesting but is taking the thread off topic. Kindly return to the topic. Thanks.Last edited by Littlejoe; 10-19-2021, 06:59 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Sheer logic says we're getting closer.
There a time Christ is going to return. He hasn't yet. Time is marching on. We're on the time conveyer belt.
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Hey, seanD and Littlejoe, your conversation is interesting but is taking the thread off topic. Kindly return to the topic. Thanks.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
Well, since we are in a thread about "are we approaching the end times" I'm not sure why you reasons would be considered a side-track but...Ok...
It's not weird at all. It's actually the way Bible students are trained to read and exegete scripture. Since the Bible canon was closed in the what...end of the 1st century(?) then we know the authors/speakers had the original hearers and readers in mind, not 21st century Americans when they spoke or wrote. So, while we can apply the Truth and Godly/Biblical principles to our modern lives. I did a quick Google search and this article explains it very well: https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-apply-today.html
This is the way I learned as well as most other trained Bible students I know (Pastors, Missionaries, Evangelists, Chaplains etc.)
I think it's weird that you can read someone else's mail and assume it's written to you.
Obviously the writers of the first century weren't addressing modern Christians 2,000 years later. I get that. But to say that the OD only applies to the disciples in the first century and thus has no relevance to us today is setting a precedent you can't escape in how you interpret the rest of the bible if you want to stay consistent.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by seanD View Post
Well, there's a lot of reasons why I don't believe the OD is just addressed to the disciples, which I won't get into lest the thread is sidetracked. But that's kind of a weird approach to biblical exegesis and seems to imply it was only relevant to the disciples. Where do you draw the line there. How do you know everything in the bible wasn't only relevant to the folks of the first century?
It's not weird at all. It's actually the way Bible students are trained to read and exegete scripture. Since the Bible canon was closed in the what...end of the 1st century(?) then we know the authors/speakers had the original hearers and readers in mind, not 21st century Americans when they spoke or wrote. So, while we can apply the Truth and Godly/Biblical principles to our modern lives. I did a quick Google search and this article explains it very well: https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-apply-today.html
This is the way I learned as well as most other trained Bible students I know (Pastors, Missionaries, Evangelists, Chaplains etc.)
I think it's weird that you can read someone else's mail and assume it's written to you.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
LittleJoe's comment is perfectly correct, and in no way means that the statements were relevant only to people of the first century. If, for example, a first century reader understood "the sun was darkened" to mean the same that we mean when we say "the sky was darkened," interpreting that statement to mean something happened to the sun would wrest the scripture. More than a few scholars fail to take first century understandings of the language and its conventions into account, which results in less than acceptable teachings on a broad range of issues - and conflicting doctrines.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by seanD View Post
Well, there's a lot of reasons why I don't believe the OD is just addressed to the disciples, which I won't get into lest the thread is sidetracked. But that's kind of a weird approach to biblical exegesis and seems to imply it was only relevant to the disciples. Where do you draw the line there. How do you know everything in the bible wasn't only relevant to the folks of the first century?
- 2 likes
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
Sure, you know that I'm an Orthodox Preterist (to be clear to those who don't know), but I really want to know why futurist take the passage globally instead of whom it was addressed to. When I took some of my training in Bible studies, it was stressed that proper exegesis started with "what did the passage mean to the original recipients" (original hearers/readers), and the collolary of "it can never mean to you what it could NOT have meant to the original recipients".
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by seanD View Post
I understand that you hold the preterist view. Matthew 24:6-8 and everything described in the OD is only really significant to those in Jerusalem prior to 70 AD, so I guess you can say it didn't matter how that information was relayed to the rest of the world. The futurist believes the OD is global-centric (though I myself don't deny that the OD had at least some significance to the Christians prior to the war). Therefore, the only thing that distinguishes the events Jesus describes on a global level is how that information is relayed to rest of the world -- our communication technology.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
Ah! Ok...but, Jesus was talking specifically to the Disciples in private, in answer to their questions. Why do you think Jesus was addressing us and not them?
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: