Friday, September 19, 2003

Re-evaluating my own BLOG on Matt: 24

I tried to write the previous post without referencing David's timeline ( for no good reason, I just got carried away). But, anyway...I think I agree that the initial verses of 4 and 5 do refer to the Papacy or Man of Sin( although the gnostics are still to blame for much of the false doctrine that the Man of Sin supported).

Also, the subsequent verses having application to the trumpets versus the seals. Afterward it kind of gets back on track. Sort of.

As David and I have discussed, the preterist view, as well as aspects of the futurist view aren't entirely accurate, but, aspects aren't necessarily false, either. Why do the preterists want to limit prophecy to only one timeframe? Likewise with the futurists? The fact that there was an abomination of desolation FULFILLED in Antiochus Epiphanes and a second one fulfilled in 70 ad gives creedance to the fact that prophesies can have multiple applications and timeline fulfillments. Why do we have to stop at 70 ad or wait until some future time only?

Ecc 1:9 That which hath been is that which shall be; and that which hath been done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

More later.

Chris

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home