tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post6440121225158745388..comments2024-03-22T16:09:48.895-04:00Comments on Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: DeMar's Last Days Madness... What Did Tertullian Really Say?James Swanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-76252373334019844222011-05-27T00:45:41.303-04:002011-05-27T00:45:41.303-04:00Somewhere I did a few lectures on end times stuff,...Somewhere I did a few lectures on end times stuff, if I find them I'll post them.<br /><br />I do find many post-mil folks producing good work, so please don't think I have any sort of animosity towards those holding that view.James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-28157761473057785702011-05-26T12:36:54.357-04:002011-05-26T12:36:54.357-04:00I may not be post-mil, but I don't have any so...I may not be post-mil, but I don't have any sort animosity towards post-mil theologians.<br /><br />I do like Bahnsen, as well as many other post-mil folks. I've not written on eschatolgy, but since the Camping situation is upon us and I've got free time this weak, well, it is what it is.<br /><br />I'm not excessively dogmatic on end times, other than dispensational theology isn't an option on the playground of reality.James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-55499527088438382972011-05-26T12:03:22.426-04:002011-05-26T12:03:22.426-04:00Hi James,
I guess I'm a little surprised by w...Hi James,<br /><br />I guess I'm a little surprised by what seems to be an anti-post-mil bias on your part. And, therefore, would be very interested to read anything that you may have previously written on the topic. Can you post a link, if applicable?<br /><br />I suppose my surprise springs from the contradiction I sense in your otherwise positive acceptance of Greg Bahnsen's work whereas he was strongly post mil.<br /><br />Thanks, again, for the good work.<br /><br />Peace.Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00759432774174066023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-2716587644333264202011-05-26T11:23:17.597-04:002011-05-26T11:23:17.597-04:00Ken-
Interesting stuff.
I can appreciate that G...Ken-<br /><br />Interesting stuff. <br /><br />I can appreciate that Gary revises his book. I think Gary makes a lot of good points, even beyond his eschatology.In regard to the partial preterist position, Gary would be my favorite out of the bunch.<br /><br />As far as I understand the whole movement, I've come across a bunch of people that joined the partial preterist position after it was embraced by Sproul. While I am fond of Dr. Sproul and hold him in very high regard, I jokingly refer to him as the "Protestant pope." Sproul though, at least to my knowledge, doesn't often speak out his shift to the post mil position. There was definite shift though at Ligonier, when it happened. If I get some time later,I'll post a blog on what i'm talking about.James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-22951239830028116212011-05-26T11:07:07.034-04:002011-05-26T11:07:07.034-04:00I looked back at my 1997 edition of Last Days Madn...I looked back at my 1997 edition of Last Days Madness and the appendix 9 on 2 Peter 3 was actually written by David Chilton, who, according to what I remember, became a full preterist (everything happened in 70 AD, even a "spiritual resurrection") right before he died.Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17824685809003307918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-48996062776929558052011-05-26T10:47:34.142-04:002011-05-26T10:47:34.142-04:00Good work, James. It is a blessing to have the ea...Good work, James. It is a blessing to have the early church fathers on the web and Google search so we can find these things. <br /><br />Keep on keeping the Roman Catholics straight on Luther, and the Partial Preterists and Post-mills straight on these issues!<br /><br />I am glad DeMar took out his terrible take on 2 Peter 3 in the 1999 edition. In an earlier edition, he had an appendix on 2 Peter 3 that even that was 70 AD. he took it out in the 1999 edition. I immediately rejected that interpretation that 2 Peter 3 was about 70 AD.<br /><br />I also thought Sproul was crazy when he wrote that Matthew 13:38-39 was 70 AD (the end of the Jewish age). <br /><br />The disciples seem to connect the destruction of the temple with "the end of the age" and "sign of Your coming" in Matthew 24:1-3 - they added those 2 things, but at first Jesus is just talking about the destruction of the temple, which did happen.<br /><br />So, in His answer, both near fulfillment (70 AD, temple destroyed, Roman armies, etc.) and far fullfillment - 2nd coming are mixed together. Revelation seems to have both interspersed.<br /><br />the Tertullian quote is interesting for he shows how those things were going on before Christ. <br /><br />there are some partial preterists who are Amill, like Jay Adams; and there are more and more pre-mills who are seeing the validity and soundness of a lot of what the partial preterists are saying and even they are adjusting their views of matthew 24/mark 13/Revelation - seeing a near fulfillment and far fulfillment. (like Isaiah 7:14)Kenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17824685809003307918noreply@blogger.com