So when i said Jesus did not retrun to earth in 70AD you a calling me a liar about that? Really..
SPEAK CLEARLY .. Are you saying that the pre-tribulation rapture doctrine is only 100 years old,, is TRUE
OR Are you saying that the pre-tribulation rapture theory is TRUE..
Also if your a preterist you would have to believe that the great tribulation happened in 70 ad and is not going to happen in the future RIGHT? If you believe the great tribulation is yet to come then you sir are a FUTURIST..
You're being kind of silly in this response. I honestly have a hard time taking you seriously if that's what you took from my comment. Coming at it like I was calling you a liar for what you believe doesn't make sense, also there was another qualification I mentioned as well. I guess this was a way to respond without even touching the real part I was calling out, about the view being 100 years old, so I listed early church fathers that taught views you'd label "preterist", and you skipped past all that to ask if I called you a liar for saying Jesus didn't return in 70ad? I don't get it.
I was clearly saying the lie was that what you call the "preterist" view was only 100 years old, that is the lie, no matter if you said it in ignorance, not knowing, or maliciously, it was a lie, or not true. I then listed early church fathers that taught the same thing, although I must concede it wasn't called "the preterist view" back then.
On the second part I see can see how the wording got funny, It was pretty bad. What I was saying was true was that the pre-trib view was the new kid on the block in the last 100 years. It was worded poorly, but there you go, that was what I meant. I wasn't saying the pre-trib view is true, goodness no, just that it was in fact guilty of being exactly what you were falsely saying the "preterist view" was.
I honestly don't understand how seeing the fact that this idea has to be brought TO the text is so hard for you to see. that without a teacher, chart, timeline, or rearranging, basically needing someone to tell you that "this really means this" and explain to you why "these plain words really mean..." There's no possible way to PULL this from the text without presupposing it onto the text. That's my honest assessment of this prominent and overwhelmingly popular view of eschatology. I do get how, this view was the only one I'd ever heard of and every preacher I ever knew or respect believes this view they were taught. This day and age of information access, I just think you have to refuse to look at it from any other way to keep from realizing and understanding how mush better the "preterist view" actually fits the text so much better without having to force it. Not just these key verses in Matthew and Revelation, I mean fits His word from Gen on completely as one cohesive story foretold and fulfilled to grow until every enemy has been put under Him to this day. Our King reigns NOW, TODAY. Seated on His throne with ALL authority in heaven and on earth.
So I apologize for the poor communication, proofreading is our friend, and I do hope this helps to make it more clear.
