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
See more
See less

William Lane Craig on Preterism

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • William Lane Craig on Preterism

    What do you guys think?

  • #2
    He is correct that Daniel 7:13 does not refer to the destruction of Jerusalem. That verse refers either to some future event, or else to Jesus's ascension. Revelation makes it fairly clear that Jesus was already on the throne at the time when the book was written. But William Lane Craig never gives much of an argument for his main premise -- that there can only be one, brief coming of the Lord. And although it's possible I just missed it, I don't think he ever explained what "this generation" supposedly means, either.


    • #3
      He had some good arguments (especially the fact that Jesus was sitting on the throne prior to 70 CE) but he sadly perpetuates (or at least implies) the misconception that to be a futurist, you have to believe in a rapture.


      Related Threads


      Topics Statistics Last Post
      Started by seanD, 01-22-2024, 09:20 PM
      23 responses
      1 like
      Last Post 3 Resurrections