|Q109 : The Preterist Interpretation of the Olivet Discourse|
I am writing my dissertation on the topic of a pastors guide for teaching the Olivet Discourse. focusing on the Book of Matthew, but I plan to cover the differences in Mark and Luke.
Although I do not agree with any of the interpretations held by historical and modern day Preterists, if you read selected passages in Matthew and take the passage literally the preterists seem to have some grounds for their arguments.
The problem however in light of other prophetic passages individual passages cannot be interpreted as stand alone text The real problem is context, context and context.
However, I am curious about what the original language may have said. Did the translators inject problems into the text that may not have been intended by the Holy Spirit. (Please comment.)
Another point of interest is that the apostles that wrote about the discourse in their Gospels were not privileged to hear the words directly from Jesus. (Please comment.)
I am finding some disagreement with respects to false christs and prophets in the first century. Dr. Ice said this was not a problem, but R.C. Sproul indicated that Josephus said there were many false christs and prophets during the first century. Have you had any opportunity to investigate this subject?