Thread: Preterist Scholars?
December 17th 2004, 12:15 PM #1
I am admittedly a newbie to eschatology, but one thing I cannot seem to find are scholarly works defending preterism.
I have read NT Wright and he is certainly a scholar, but he does not deal with the topic in a systematic way.
I have now read some of DeMar's stuff and listened to the Dan Trotter audio series, and while their stuff is good, it does not deal the subject at a scholarly level.
By scholar I mean someone who has earned a doctorate at an accredited university in the appropriate field.
I realize most of the stuff put out by futurists is not scholarly either, so I don't think this problem is unique for preterists.
Anyone have any suggestions?
December 17th 2004, 07:11 PM #2
Re: Preterist Scholars?
R.C. Sproul has the creditials, but I wouldn't call his Last Days According to Jesus scholarly.
Maybe some of Kenneth Gentry's more scholarly works on the topic (not that I have read any, I've only read one 'popular' book by him)?Where is human nature so weak as in the bookstore?- Henry Ward Beecher
"I agree fully with all Faramir has said" - Dee Dee Warren
“Duty…is the sublimest word in our language. Do your duty in all things…. You cannot do more; you should never wish to do less.” -- Robert E. Lee
December 17th 2004, 07:18 PM #3
Re: Preterist Scholars?Originally posted by Makarios
-Tim"No matter that the Patriarchs are personally promised such an inheriting; that the Messiah is personally to receive the land as an inheritance; that the saints, as part of a perfected Redemption, are to realize it; that a thousand predictions direct attention to it, the leaven of the old Gnostic spirit against matter and the claimed higher spirituality, deliberately refuses the plain grammatical sense, and substitutes another sense at the will of the interpreter." - George Peters
December 17th 2004, 07:32 PM #4
Re: Preterist Scholars?Originally posted by Makarios
Here are some reviews:
"Sir Robert Anderson is a giant among giants and anything he wrote is worth having on one's library shelf.This volume concerns itself with Daniel's seventy weeks and the coming anti-christ,and is considered the standard work on the subject"("Baptist Testimony").
"This classic interpretation of the book of Daniel,dealing with the prophecy of the ninth chapter in particular,has long been considered a standard volume in the field,often quoted,and original in its fresh exposition of Daniel's seventy weeks...This book belongs on the shelf of every pastor and layman intelligent in the study of the prophetic Word"(Dr.John F.Walvood,Past-President of the Dallas Theological Seminary).
You can find it here:
December 18th 2004, 08:44 PM #5
Makarios >> I realize most of the stuff put out by futurists is not scholarly either, so I don't think this problem is unique for preterists. Anyone have any suggestions?
I too have been looking around for someone to explain Preterism to me while making sense at the same time. To me those holding to this interpretation tripped and stumbled somewhere in Matthew 24 over the ‘fig tree’ and ‘this generation.’ They seem to believe that Christ was most certainly speaking to the generation living in that day. The problem is that Christ told them straight away that He had no idea when these things would take place.
“This Generation” (Matt. 24:36) to see the ‘end of the age’ and ‘His coming’ (Matt. 24:3) will be the one to see ‘all’ these signs Christ just described. Apparently the simplicity of this truth escapes them, and they implant the knowledge of ‘when’ these things happen into the mind of the Son anyway. Then, Christ says that this ‘gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to ALL THE NATIONS, and then the end will come.’ Matt. 24:14. They cannot distinguish between the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ with repentance and water baptism (Mark 1:4, Acts 2:38) and our ‘Christ and Him crucified’ (1Cor. 2:2) for today. Then they point to Paul’s statement about their ‘faith is being proclaimed throughout the whole world’ (Rom. 1:8), and the rest is history; as if their ‘faith’ equals the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’ And the fact that Revelation was written twenty or thirty years after Jerusalem was leveled? Well . . .
Hopefully someone will come along who can provide as series of supported statements on this topic that makes some sense.
Terral“For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.” Hebrews 4:12.
December 19th 2004, 01:18 AM #6
Re: Who Knows?Originally posted by Terral
They cannot distinguish between the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ with repentance and water baptism (Mark 1:4, Acts 2:38) and our ‘Christ and Him crucified’ (1Cor. 2:2) for today.
And the fact that Revelation was written twenty or thirty years after Jerusalem was leveled? Well . . .
Last edited by Makarios; December 19th 2004 at 01:25 AM.
December 19th 2004, 01:32 AM #7
Re: Who Knows?
hey, you guys should respect the OP writers' instention. either answer the question or butt out. there are other threads to debate this.
sorry Mak, but i'm also new to this subject, so i'm not aware of any scholarly work focused on Preterism. the closest i know of is J.P. Holding's stuff... even though he isn't a scholar per se, IMO he is scholarly enough to count.Living so free is a tragedy
When you can't be what you want to be
Living so free is a tragedy
When you can't see what you need to see
-- Powerman 5000, "Free"
By Dave G in forum Theology 201Replies: 0Last Post: June 21st 2007, 12:34 AM
By Geifodd in forum Comparative Religions 101Replies: 1Last Post: August 23rd 2006, 06:26 PM
By Amazing Rando in forum Student ActivitiesReplies: 8Last Post: June 25th 2006, 09:51 PM
By Jezz in forum Apologetics 301Replies: 42Last Post: June 2nd 2004, 12:42 AM