Timeline for What reconciliation do those who hold to the Doctrine of Imminence offer regarding Peter’s foretold death?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 days ago | comment | added | Jacob McDougle | But there is in fact something to reconcile regarding the truth of such a doctrine during Peter’s lifetime. Perhaps the early church could have thought of an imminent return and even expected it, but it could not have occurred while Peter was alive. That’s the reconciliation that would need to happen. Perhaps not from the early church perspective, but from the perspective of those who assert Christ’s return has been imminent since his ascension (as my question lays out and MacArthur and others suggest). | |
| 2 days ago | comment | added | Anne | The imminence view (as per MacArthur et al) does not need to be defended with regard to the early Church and 1st generation Christians. They were all expectantly awaiting an imminent return of Christ. It is trying to LIMIT that to just that brief era that is problematic. My answer shows that even those with that limited view have nothing to defend re. Peter's foretold death. Nor do those who don't have that limited view have anything to defend, or to reconcile. | |
| 2 days ago | comment | added | Jacob McDougle | For the most part, I'm personally inclined to agree here. However, my question is geared towards those who hold to a view of imminence as MacArthur lays out here("From the very earliest days of the church, the apostles and first-generation Christians nurtured an earnest expectation and fervent hope that Christ might suddenly return at any time to gather His church to heaven"). What defense do they have that such doctrinal view was true for first generation/early church? | |
| 2 days ago | history | answered | Anne | CC BY-SA 4.0 |