The end of Daniel Chapter 11 does not seem to yet be underway.
That point & the fact that I don't see a direct enough fulfillment of Matthew 24 v 5 leads me to think that Matt 24 & Rev 6 are not yet LIVE EVENTS.
Also, Chris White's podcast (similar): https://t.co/BOukiswLTa
@Neloangelo314@Soul17Quantum Chris White on a podcast said at one time that the devil would like Christians to think that the end times have arrived, before they actually do.
Helps with deception.
I suppose a few 'cry wolf's' over the arrival of the antichrist will assist when the actual one comes along.
@DrAlanKurschner Interesting subject.
I remember hearing the view that it was not on the 'Temple Mount' (too big an area and more likely the Roman HQ apparently).
Look forward to hearing more about this matter on the podcast.
@Joel7Richardson Premil sounds correct to me.
I have a good Christian friend with whom I agree with on almost everything, except eschatology.
He agrees with us on transgenderism for example.
He's Postmil.
Most Christians have theological views that reflect their background. e.g. ๐๐ป
@ancientorigins Similarly wrong on the New Testament and gospels.
If they had been 'harmonized' later then the separate accounts would not look like authentic eye witness accounts.
@ancientorigins Wrong.
If the story of Abraham was made up hundreds of years later by 2nd Temple Jews they wouldn't have made up stories of him (and Jacob also) fathering children with the wife's / wives' maids.
That would go against their culture and traditions.
@TBush1689@Eschatology22@JPHowardSr Of course, their opinions are just that, even though the likes of Polycarp seem to have had time to talk directly with John.
It would concern me if the Church Fathers were absolutely correct on all subjects, not just eschatology.
@TBush1689@Eschatology22@JPHowardSr Got it.
In fact I now realize that I had started to listen to this talk below by Michael Shultz (Historic Premillennialism).
I'll try to finish it.
I wonder if Church Fathers come up during the Dispensationalist talk or the group discussion? https://t.co/URcd0gr66I
@Eschatology22@JPHowardSr@TBush1689 I don't have the feeling that this particular question is accounted for in the usual historic vs dispensationalist assumptions.
Perhaps someone from the A or Post camp could host a discussion between a pretribber & a prewrath on this.
@Eschatology22@JPHowardSr@TBush1689 I know the A- & Post- mil view of premils is that we are divided into historic & 'dispy'..
But there is a discussion on the proximity of modern views to the Early Church Fathers.
Charles Cooper ๐๐ป said that ECF statements close to current Prewrath. https://t.co/szF7jbeQRl
@Eschatology22@douglaswils@YourCalvinist Can you ask the king of the Amils whether all Amils & Fancy Amils will continue to be discouraged from using Premil terms like posttrib, pretrib, midtrib & whether the absolute ban on the mention of PREWRATH will be maintained?
Are 'historic' & 'dispy' the only approved terms?
@Eschatology22@douglaswils@YourCalvinist Thank you for passing on the king's decrees, especially the 1st concerning fancy Amils.
I presume that the jurisdiction of the king's realm stretches only over fancy Amils & not to premils?
I have a question for the Amil king if you dare enter his presence without a summons.