Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I would say that the first and second beasts of Revelation are Satanicly inspirered kingdoms. Consider Daniel. Successively arising beasts are always interpreted as kingdoms, and they should be so interpreted in Revelation.
  2. Consider the meaning of erecting an image in honor of the first beast. To do so is to cultivate worship of the first beast, which is precisely what the later empire did towards the early empire in an effort to reassure the citizens of it's weakened State that they had a heratige worth preserving. If you have a problem with later Rome not using a literal image in honor of pagan Rome please consider the extremely broad definition if idolatry that Paul uses when warning the church against this sin. You are right, the AD 70 desruction of the temple was an eschatologicaly significant event, but it has little bearing on Revelation, which was written about 20 years after that. If I had to describe myself I would use the term 5th century preterist, in that I believe the consument event ofRevelation was the destruction of the great city, which was the sack of Rome in AD 410.
  3. Think a little bit. Internal distractions are like family squabling, they remain resolvable until an outside party starts offering to lend muscle to one side or the other. Then they become toxic and potentially fatal. All the religious wars of the medieval era can be traced to one side or the other seeking support from the state. If we were forced to resolve our differences without outside parties lending support to one side or the other (even in the case where the outside party is supporting the biblically consistent side, Martin) we could work out our differences without alienating or killing one another.
  4. I am not advocating for a withdrawal from society. We should participate as much as our alliagance to Christ allows. The problem occurs when one party or the other promises to favor our church or religion over another if we vote for them. Tempting, but we must never fall for it. Christ was explicit, "My kingdom is not of this world". Any attempt by the state to create an environment in which the church is comfortable will fail and will result in embitterment on the part of the world, our mission field. If we follow that course to it's conclusion the end will be a return to the medieval era, where the church exercised coercive power along side the state.
  5. I agree that this is not a primary issue. I consider all my dispensationalist co-posters to be brothers and would worship with any of them. The thing of it is, if my theory is correct, then there is a warning here that the church should not miss. The warning is that there are two great threats that the church faces from the state, oppression is the one we are all on guard against, but to be co-opted by the state is a terrible thing too. Please pardon me if I offend anybody here, but I am appalled at the degree to which the white evangelical church has allowed itself to be sucked into the republican party. On several occasions I have tried to get on spiritual ground with someone and have been given the stink eye as being just another one of the blankety blank conservatives who want to ruin the country with there bible thumping gun toting policies. The message of grace is getting completely drowned out in a barrage of partisan opinion mongering. But that sword cuts both ways. How often does the typical black urban church preach salvation by the blood instead of deliverance by alligience to the democratic party? This division and dilution of the message of grace can all be traced the the various branches of the church (which should not consider themselves branches in the first place, but that is another topic) allowing themselves to be co-opted by various organs of the state.
  6. DanielConway


    Hi. Would it be possible to add to this site a place to post scholarly work? I tried linking to a paper I wrote out on scribd but the webmasters put the kiebosh on that. Sometimes a properly referenced paper is a bit much to type into a discussion forum and it would be nice to just upload the work and reference it.
  7. It has come to my attention that outside links are not allowed on this site. My apologies to the web masters. If you wish to look at my work enter "the two beasts of Revelation 13 identified scribd" on the Google search bar and look for the paper authored by Daniel Conway. I queried the webmasters about this and it turns out they are pretty flexible. As soon as I attain unto advanced user status I can start attaching work to my posts. "love is patient".
  8. Let me address both your objections. The Pagan empire was before the later Empire in both senses. Consider what the paper says. Both Diocletian and Constantine knew quite well that their reconstituted empire was a palpably weaker break from the past. In fact in order to foster alliagence to it they cultivated an attitude of worship of the old empire. In this sense Pagan Rome came before Constantinian Rome. I argue for chronological precedence as well by citing the example of Daniel. Everyone here acknowledges that the successively appearing beasts of Daniel's vision correspond to successively arising kingdoms. I argue biblical consistancy, what applies to Daniel applies to Revelation. As far as the past-present-future objection is concerned, there is no inconsistency in mapping the second beast onto the later empire, as the later empire arose about 200 years after the time of John. Please note that a 200 year time frame for prophetic fullfillment is far more consistent with christ's assertion that these things must happen soon the a 2000 year time gap that the dispensationalists assert.
  9. You know, I don't know if non scribd members can see that paper. I might have egg on my face. No apologies for the length of the paper, however. The concepts are subtle and involved and deeply embedded in the history of the early church, a history that not every Christian is familiar with and requires some description to carry the arguement.
  10. Are you guys OK with links to external sites? I looked for an internal place to post a paper I have written but couldn't find one so I inserted a link out to my work on scribd.
  11. A cross post to the eschatology forum
  12. I just made a post in the eschatology forum that I would like to cross post to the church history forum. Is there a way to do this? It would be a waste of time to enter the same information twice.
  13. Hello all. This is my first post here in the eschatology forum. I can't put the full text of my ideas here, to lengthy, but I can point you to a paper over on scribd that you should take a look at for a partial preterist interpretation of Revelatation 13. Please read and comment.
  14. I quick question. Is it possible to post attachments here or do I need to do something like post it to scribd and include a link to it here.
  15. I understand your need to filter this site for bots and spammers. I have tried posting to other sites and have been amazed at the amount of junk mail that showed up in my mailbox advertising "prophesy" seminars.
  • Create New...